BX 

1842. a. 



' LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, J 

Qi 

Chap. 

| Shelf. | 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 





LETTER 



TO 



REV, FREDERICK T. GRAY, 



r 



The following Letter has been delayed several 
weeks from various causes ; the principal one, how- 
ever, is that the writer has been refused access to the 
Records of the Society, by the Clerk, and he has 
seen them but once since Mr. Gray's Sermons were 
first published, and that was during the absence of 
the Clerk from the City, when the Books of the 
Society were left with the Treasurer, who allowed 
the writer the use of them one evening, at his house. 
The files of the Society, which contain many papers 
not on record, he has not seen at all, but has in 
some cases, stated them from recollection. Whether 
this was in accordance with the duty of the Clerk 
the reader will judge from the following extract from 
the By-Laws of the Society : — 

" He [the Clerk] shall attend the meetings of the Society and 
Committee, and keep a record of the transactions of each,, which 
shall be open to inspection at all times." 



LETTER 



REV. FREDERICK T. GRAY 



STRICTURES ON TWO SERMONS, 



PREACHED BY HIM ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1841, AT THE " BULFINCII STREET CHURCH. 



BY A PROPRIETOR OP SAID CHURCH. 

1 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him." 



A 



BOSTON: 
BENJAMIN B . MUSSEY 

1842. 



BOSTON : 
PRINTED BV S. N. DICKINSON, 
WA.SHTNOTON STREET. 



LETTER, ETC. 



Rev. Frederick T. Gray : 

Sir: I listened to and have subsequently read with more 
than usual attention your two Sermons, entitled " Christ and him 
Crucified," and not being perfectly satisfied with many of the state- 
ments therein contained, I have concluded to address you on the 
subject. 

I have entitled my letter " Strictures," but I do not intend to 
go into a labored criticism of the Sermons, as literary produc- 
tions, but rather to animadvert upon the facts, (or rather pre- 
tended facts,) set forth therein, and upon which the whole su- 
perstructure rests. 

You state that you shall first answer the question — ■ 

" Why you came among us ; " 

Secondly, " What you came to preach; " 

Thirdly, " State the condition of the Society ; " and 

Fourthly, " Allude to the importance of, and the difficulties 
attending the work devolving upon you when you earned 

Before proceeding to my task, I take the opportunity to re- 
mark, that to a casual observer, one unacquainted with the facts 
in the case, the spirit of the production would seem to be worthy 
of all commendation. But before concluding, I think I shall be 
able to show the reader that the work coniains such an admixture of 
truth and error as may safely be left to the judgment of a dis- 
criminating public, whose sentence I will not as yet undertake 
to anticipate. 

You in the first place propose to answer the question, e< Why 
you came among us." 



4 



Bat sir, there is a question more important than that, and 

which must be answered before any one can have a correct view 
of your position, or of the true cause of the division in the Society 
upon which you have been forced. That question is, " How 
did you come among us ? " This I propose to answer before I 
consider the reasons you have offered for forming the relation 
you now sustain to the " Central Universalist Society; " and I hope 
to do it " simply and plainly," and at the same time in " chris- 
tian charity," but " with becoming dignity and true manliness," 
for I have as little respect as you can have for " that timidity " 
which will not show " an honest indignation and a becoming 
self-respect." 

I have no skill in polemics ; neither have I the ability, if I had 
the wish, to enter into an elaborate examination of the difference 
between Unitarianism and Universalism. Nor do I deem it neces- 
sary in this case that it should be done ; for this is no controversy 
between Unitarianism and Universalism. The true issue is 
between an attempt to practice dishonest bargaining — a low kind 
of legal cunning, (to obtain a pulpit,) — and a fair, open, manly and 
honorable course ; for I propose to show that your coming among 
us was the consummation of a kind of intrigue or conspiracy 
which had existed in the Society for a long time, and that this 
was not only well known to you before you consented to come, 
but that you aided and assisted in the matter. Could I believe 
that you were the innocent dupe in this intrigue, I should be as 
willing to acquit you as any of your friends; but the evidence to 
the contrary in the case is so indubitable fe and overwhelming, as 
to defy even a doubt. 

It is well known to the members of the Society, and to many 
others, that since the formation of the u Massachusetts Association 
of Universal Restorationists" and the connection of Rev. Paul 
Dean with a paper called the " Independent Messenger," the 
Society had been gradually on the decline ; divisions had been 
engendered ; heart-burnings and bickerings were the conse- 
quence ; and many had left the church to worship in other 



5 



places, while they contributed to the support of Rev. Mr. Dean, 
to whom, personally, they had a strong attachment, but disap- 
proved, or else had no relish for his religious controversies, and 
his strong opposition to his former ministerial associates. Many 
who remained were also dissatisfied that he should have alto- 
gether discontinued his ministerial exchanges with the denomina- 
tion with which he had been so long connected, and it was this feel- 
•ing which gave rise to the resolution of the proprietors in your 
Appendix G, May 6, 1838, "That the Standing Committee be 
directed to request our Pastor to exchange his ministerial services 
with those of the Universalist order and also the following 
vote of the Standing Committee : 

Tuesday Evening, March 5, 1839. 
A motion was made that the Standing Committee recommend to the 
Proprietors the propriety of requesting Mr. Dean to exchange with Uni- 
versalist ministers. Question taken by yea and nay: Yea, Messrs. Ja- 
cobs, Richards, Baldwin, Grover, Davis. Nay, Page. 

This vote of the Standing Committee introduced the sub- 
ject to the proprietors April 28, 1839, and it would seem as 
if one who had given " all the facts," would have stated the fact 
of the existence of this vote, it being a matter of record on the 
books of the Society. 

At this time, April 28, 1839, the proprietors seemed convinc- 
ed that something must be done to sustain the Society. Many 
of the proprietors had left the house, as a place of worship, and 
the number of worshippers had dwindled down to about two 
hundred and fifty. At this meeting a committee of five were 
appointed to confer with Mr. Dean on the subject of exchanging 
with Universalist ministers. A motion was also made to post- 
pone the subject of Mr. Dean's salary till an adjourned meeting, 
(May 19, 1S39,) when the following report was made by the 
Committee : 

The committee, appointed at the annual meeting to consult with Mr. 
Dean respecting exchanging with Universalist ministers, made the follow- 
ing report, which was read : 

The committee, appointed at ttre annual meeting to consult with Mr. 
Dean on the subject of exchanges, met him at his house, and, after a very 



6 



free and cordial interchange of views and feelings, directed the chairman 
to report, — That Mr. Dean has always enjoyed the usual privilege in rela- 
tion to exchanges, and is still desirous to continue in the exercise of it, 
with the assurance that the best interests of the Society, and the cause of 
religion, will always be kept in view by him. 

For the Committee, William Sparrell. 

Boston, May 18, 1839. 

The Report was considered by many in the Society as equivo- 
cal and evasive, and a motion was made to recommit it to the 
Committee, with instructions to request Mr. Dean to say whether 
there were any good reasons existing why he should not exchange 
with Universalist ministers. When the question on this motion 
was taken, thirty-four voted in the affirmative, and thirty-three 
in the negative. The chairman then voted in the negative, and 
so the vote was lost, there not being a majority in favor of it. 
The report was then accepted, thirty-eight voting in favor of it, 
and thirty against it. At this meeting it was also voted to give 
Mr. Dean the same salary as last year, and you will see by the 
following statement how all this was accomplished. On the 16th 
of May, Mr. Dean sold pew No. 18 to Mr. J. P. Fessenden, for 
the purpose of obtaining his vote for the acceptance of the Re- 
port of the Committee, and the continuance of Mr. Dean's salary. 
On the 17th he transferred pew No. 54 to Thomas Tolman, and 
No. 32 to John Thornton, for the purpose of making them 
voters in the Society; and on the 18th, Mr. Richard Upjohn 
transferred pew No. 55 to Elijah Clark, Jr. and No. 56 to 
Samuel Curtis, for the same purpose. The two last named pews, 
though purchased of the Society by Mr. Upjohn, in the summer 
of 1838, were paid for by Mr. Dean, and were under his control 
till some time after you was installed. Mr. Fessenden 
was the only real purchaser of the whole five who took trans- 
fers, and the only one who retains his pew ; and of the five real 
or pretended purchasers, Mr. Fessenden and Mr. Clark are the 
only worshippers in the house. M. L. Wallace transferred pew 
No. 35 to his son, M.L.Wallace, Jr. 

All these pretended purchases, transfers and sales were 



/ 



7 



for the purpose of swelling the numbers of those who 
would vote in favor of the new policy which had been secretly- 
determined on, and was now put into operation. These proceed- 
ings indicated a desperation on the part of those who were busy- 
in the work. 

Here was an opportunity for any one who was so disposed to 
spy out the nakedness of the land ; and whether it was at this 
point that the resolution was formed and the plot was laid which 
have resulted in wresting the church from its original design, is 
a matter which subsequent events may serve in some measure 
to show. 

Seasons of deep despondency and gloom are dangerous to the 
human character. Then the virtue of the individual is subjected 
to severe tests ; then temptation to treachery is excited, and 
stern must be the virtue of the individual who can resist it. The 
history of our own country exhibits an instance of startling 
treachery committed at such a season by one who was a minis- 
tering priest at the altar of liberty. As in the history of the 
Revolution so in the history of this Society, one that was called 
to minister at the holy altar became a prey to temptation, and 
in an evil hour he conceived the plot which, with the assistance 
of other disaffected spirits, resulted in wresting from its original 
destination the Church which he was bound by his own con- 
science and fealty to the God whom he served, to protect from 
the grasp of the enemy. He fell; and those who connived at 
his treachery, and with him divided the ill-gotten gain, complain 
of the spirit with which those who have been defrauded, en- 
trapped and deceived, arraign the culprits for their perfidy. 

The Society was thus divided, and in this situation, when Mr. 
Dean commenced his negotiation with you, which resulted in 
your settlement over the Society ; and it may well excite surprise 
that after two years' deliberation on the subject, and after you 
had concluded to come out and vindicate yourself before the 
public, that you should have hardly touched the matters of com- 
plaint against you. 



8 



A majority of the Society were entirely ignorant, at the time 
your call was voted, of the management in the matter between 
you and Mr. Dean, previous to the subject of your call coming be- 
fore them. Some of them knew that some movement was 
making in the matter, but what it was no one but those who were 
in the secret could tell. The week previous, Mr. Dean called on 
one of the members of the church, a lady, who was also a pro- 
prietor in the church, and requested her to attend the meeting of 
the proprietors on the next sabbath, and told her that they in- 
tended to invite you as colleague with him. Mr. Dean enjoined 
secrecy upon her. She objected to the whole business as mean 
and unchristian, and said she would have nothing to do with it, 
except to vote against it. 

On Thursday evening, the 24th of October, three days pre- 
vious to your call, she informed one of the other proprietors of 
what was contemplated ; and this was the first intimation those 
who now oppose you had of the intention to call you. But you 
will say, perhaps, that you were not to blame for this ; and this 
would be a correct position provided you were ignorant of the 
circumstances when you accepted the call, which I apprehend 
you will not pretend, with all the evidence against such a suppo- 
sition which you must know exists, and which will be used in 
the case, in all human probability, before its final issue. 

The facts in the case are, that several private caucuses had 
been held at the houses 'of Mr. Dean, Mr. Elijah Clark, and 
Mr. Theophilus Burr, to consult on the matter, and to determine 
how it could be best accomplished — at all which meet- 
ings the strictest secrecy was enjoined. At one of these cau- 
cuses a committee of three was appointed to call on you and 
confer with you on the subject of your becoming a colleague with 
Mr. Dean. You consented without much hesitation, and they 
conferred with you as to the conditions, and the whole matter 
was arranged between you, Mr. Dean and this Committee, 
before the subject was opened to the Society. 

But this was not all that was necessary to accomplish the 



9 



object. After the whole scheme had been concluded upon, it 
was necessary to cast about and ascertain how you could obtain 
votes for the sanction and adoption of what had been done. 
How this was accomplished may be ascertained by referring to 
the votes for your final settlement. 

Mr. Dean was the real owner of several pews in the house, of 
which he had become proprietor some time previous. On or 
about the 18th of May, 1839, the day before the time of voting 
his salary, as may be seen by referring to a previous page, he 
had transferred, or caused to be transferred, five of these pews. 
The remainder were transferred to individuals who it was thought 
would best subserve the purposes of this secret plot. 

From the use you make of names it is concluded that it was 
thought that to obtain the votes of some of the original petition- 
ers and proprietors would add influence to a desperate cause, and 
on the 26th of October, the day previous to your call, four pews, 
purchased of the Society by Mr. Upjohn, but paid for and con- 
trolled by Mr. Dean, were transferred as follows, viz : 

Pew No. 5, North Gallery, to Henry D. Gray, an original 
proprietor, who had sold the pew he originally owned, and was 
then, and ever since has been a worshipper in Rev. Mr. Rob- 
bins' church. 

Pew No. 4, North Gallery, to Henry Dean. 
" " 3, " " " Charles Woodbury. 
" " 24, to Robert Burr. 

These transfers were, beyond all doubt, made to secure your 
call, as none of the pews were really sold, but merely transferred 
for the purpose of making voters, a measure equally at variance 
with the moral and the civil law. 

But still it was feared there were not yet a sufficient number 
of voters to accomplish the object. A subscription was therefore 
opened among your friends, and eight cheap pews in the South Gal- 
lery, which had remained unsold ever since the church was built, 
"were sold to individuals, all of whom," as the Treasurer says, 
" were worshippers in the house but for a better idea of the 
2 



10 



manner in which this was done, we must look to the Treasurer's 
books, and we shall there see more clearly how it was accomplish- 
ed. Some part of this record seems to have been " expunged ; " 
yet trace enough of the original is left to throw some light on the 
subject. The " eight pews in the South Gallery, belonging to the 
Society," which the Treasurer tells us, " were sold to individuals 
all of whomwere worshippers in the house," were transferred, ac- 
cording to the Treasurer's record, as follows : 

" October 25, [1839,] 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, South Gallery, [from the 
Society to Theophilus Burr, and deeded*] 
No. 3, to Robert E. Newman, 

" 4, to Darwin E. Jewett, 

" 5, to John B. Bolton, 

« 7, to J. C. Lund, 

" 8, to Edward Roulstone, 

" 9, to Benjamin Bradley, 

" 10, to Alpha Sawyer, 

« 11, to Nahum S. VVyeth." 

I am personally acquainted with but two of these individuals. 
One of them, Mr. Benjamin Bradley, was at this time, and has 
been ever since, a worshipper in Rev. Mr. Rogers' church, the 
veracious Treasurer's assertion to the contrary notwithstanding. 

Besides these pews, those proprietors who owned two pews 
deeded away one, and thus extended the whole influence of 
party to an extent which enabled your friends to settle you by a 
majority of nine out of an aggregate of one hundred and nine 
proprietors. 

After all this manoeuvering it was not thought practicable to 
attempt your settlement at a meeting legally called for this pur- 
pose. Consequently no notice of it was given to the Clerk of 
the Society, and only the following notice was given by him : 

"NOTICE. 

"A Quarterly meeting of the Bulfinch Street Society will be held in this 
House, on Sunday the 27th inst. immediately after Divine service in the 
afternoon. 

« Oct. 20 ; 1839. BARNA. THACHER, Clerk.,' 



* The reader is informed that the words here enclosed in brackets, have been 
erased in the record, by whose hand ; and for what purpose, and at whose instigation 
this was done, the public will judge. The production under examination gives us no 
information on this point. 



After the meeting had been organized, the following letter 
from Mr. Dean was read. It bears date Oct. 27, 1839, and on 
the same day it was acted upon. 

" To THE BlLLFINCH STREET SOCIETY, 

" Beloved Brethren: After the most mature and serious deliberation, 
and for reasons which will readily occur to your minds, I have felt it my 
duty to respectfully request of you that you will invite the Rev. Frederick 
T. Gray, to become associate Pastor with your humble servant. 

" This measure, while it will not increase your pecuniary burthens, it is 
believed will greatly promote your social and religious interests, and the 
cause of Christ among us, for which I shall never cease earnestly to 
pray. Your affectionate Pastor, 

"Boston, Oct. 27, 1839 PAUL DEAN." 

When the minority saw that it was the intention of the ma- 
jority to take them by surprise, and foist upon them a man of 
whom they knew little or nothing, and this too by means as 
clearly at variance with the law of the land as they were with 
the principles of Christianity, for the inculcation of which the 
proprietors had invested their money in the house, do you won- 
der that they should oppose you, and that too earnestly and de- 
cidedly ? It was no personal hostility which induced this oppo- 
sition, but it was founded on a hatred of all mean and treacher- 
ous action, whether in clergymen or laymen. They believed it 
to be clearly at variance with both the letter and spirit of the third 
article of the Bill of Rights, as set forth in the 11th article of 
amendments of the Constitution, which declares that, 

" As the public worship of God, and instructions in piety, religion and 
morality, promote the happiness and prosperity of a people, and the 
security of a republican government; therefore, the several religious so- 
cieties of this Commonwealth, whether corporate or unincorporate, at any 
meeting legally warned and holden for that purpose, shall ever have the 
right to elect their pastors or religious teachers, to contract with them for 
their support, to raise money for erecting and repairing houses for public 
worship, for the maintenance of religious instruction, and for the payment 
of necessary expenses." 

This was urged in vain as a reason why the business should 
be postponed until a legal meeting of the Society should be 
called, and that an opportunity might be offered for you to preach 
as a " candidate " before final action should be had upon the 
subject. But no ! the conspirators had come prepared for their 



12 



work, and were determined to finish it as they had begun. At 
this time no opportunity had been given to obtain a knowledge of 
the character and qualifications of the preacher thus offered to 
them, and many of those who voted in your favor were entirely 
ignorant of the extent of the plot which had been laid and was 
now to be consummated. Had they possessed this information 
it is exceedingly doubtful whether the vote could have been 
passed. 

The following is from the records of the Society: 

" The following motion was then made by Mr. Dame, and seconded by 
Mr. Burr: 

" Voted, That the communication this day received from our Rev. Pastor 
relative to the employment of the Rev. Frederick T. Gray as an associate 
with him, be referred to the Standing Committee of the Society, with in- 
structions to make an engagement as aforesaid with the Rev. Mr. Gray, 
provided the same can be done ivithout any additional expense to the 
Society. 

"It was then Voted, That when the vote be taken, it be taken by yeas 
and nays. After some debate on the question, the vote was taken and de- 
cided in the affirmative — 59 to 50. 

" Oct. 27, 1839." 

It is a matter of surprise to me to know that any clergyman 
possessed of a single spark of the spirit of his Master could be 
guilty of so dishonorable an act as the acceptance of a call under 
such circumstances ; in view of the small majority which voted 
for the call, and that his services were to be rendered without 
compensation from the Society. But so it is. The first commis- 
sion of crime is always mean and tremulous ; and when a man 
has once consented to deviate from the path of rectitude and 
truth, he will always find himself beset on every hand with 
temptations to wander still farther, in order to conceal his first 
step in error, and this position is fully illustrated by your own 
case. 

The Standing Committee, who were authorized to make an 
engagement with you, provided it could be done " without ad- 
ditional expense to the Society" addressed you a letter on Mon- 
day the 28th of October, giving you the invitation authorized by 
the Society the day previous. To this invitation you returned 



13 



an answer during the week, which was read on Sunday- 
morning, Nov. 3, in the Standing Committee, and to the con- 
gregation from the desk the same day. 

In this letter occurs the following extraordinary sentence : 

"My first impressions were unfavorable to your request, in the thought 
of separating from those I so tenderly loved ; but upon a more mature 
reflection of the subject, and on advising with those christian friends 
in whose judgment I confide, I have felt it my duty, under all the cir- 
cumstances in the case, to accept the call you have given me. And feel- 
ing it the hand of God leading me among you, I have sought His blessing 
upon my decision, without which all our labors and efforts are in vain." 

Now sir, let us examine this for one moment. If we look 
back at the proceedings in this business, we find by the foregoing 
statement, which no one can deny, that you were aware of all the 
proceedings in the portion of the Society which invited you, and 
it seems that you had consented to come as colleague with Mr. 
Dean ; that you had so said to a committee from a private cau- 
cus, and that you had so said to Mr. Dean, and he had announced 
it to the Society in his letter to them dated the 27th of October 
1 839 ; but after all this, after the labor of weeks and perhaps months 
had been accomplished, and you had obtained from the Society 
what you seemed so ardently to desire — a call, you pretend that 
you still hesitated, that you was still in doubt as to its acceptance, 
and that your "first impressions were unfavorable to " their " re- 
quest, in the thought of separating from those you so " tenderly 
loved," and that you would not decide in the matter until you 
had consulted with those "christian friends in whose judgment" 
you confided ; and you then add, " and feeling it to be the hand 
of God leading me among you, I have sought His blessing upon 
my decision, without which all our labors and efforts are in 
vain." 

Now for one moment compare this last declaration with the facts 
as they existed. You are consulting with christian friends and 
asking the blessing of God to aid you in making a decision to which 
you have already arrived, and which has already been announced 



14 



to the Society, with which you propose to labor, by its senior 
pastor, saying that, calling the Rev. F. T. Gray " will not increase 
your pecuniary burthens." I leave this to you. It is a dilemma 
which the first step in this error has led you into, and seemed to 
make necessary in order to conceal the wickedness of this un- 
righteous conspiracy. 

I have now briefly shown how you came among us, and this 
will bring me to an examination of the reasons you have given 
■why you came. And as you treat things a little out of the order 
in which they occurred, I shall examine your four propositions 
without particular reference to the order in which you state 
them. 

You say " it is a matter of great satisfaction to know that the 
facts to which you shall allude are matters of record in the books 
of the church and Society." This fact is to me no less " a 
matter of satisfaction " than to you, and I am willing to abide 
the issue upon, " the records of the Church and Society ; " and 
when I speak of these " records," I mean the genuine records, 
without the mutilations, misconstructions, and misrepresentations 
of those partisan individuals who now control them. 

You say — " 1st, I came because you as a church and people 
desired it; " and you then proceed to amplify on the subject in a 
manner well calculated to divert the mind of the reader from the 
plain proposition itself, and from reflecting upon its absurdity. 
I say absurdity, because we have already seen that you had agreed 
to come as colleague with Mr. Dean — that you had so promised 
to a committee from a private caucus held to consult upon the sub- 
ject, and that you had bargained with Mr. Dean about it, so that 
he was authorized to say, and did say to the Society, that " this 
measure would not increase its pecuniary burthens." Now to 
those who know all these proceedings, it surely must appear a 
gross absurdity to suppose you came " because the Church and 
people desired it." The truth is that the whole business was 
arranged beforehand, and then it became necessary to find a' 



15 



Church and .people to vote for it, and we shall shortly see how 
this was accomplished. 

You say " of the twenty now living who petitioned for the 
act of incorporation, eighteen years since, fourteen voted for your 
settlement," and add, "could you slight a request coming from 
these venerable and much respected individuals ? " 

This may be a good reason in the eyes of those who know 
nothing of the circumstances which attended your coming. 
But sir, you and J know, that all this was contrived. We 
know that the pastor of the Bulfinch Street Church caused pews 
to be deeded to individuals who had not been worshippers for 
years, but had left the church long before, and at the very time 
worshipped with their families in other churches. Some of these 
men took deeds of pews from Mr. Dean on the 18th day of 
May, only the day previous to the time the Society voted him 
his salary — others were deeded on the 26th of October, 1839, the 
day previous to your call. Now sir, you knew all this, when 
you preached and published your sermons, and still you talk of 
original proprietors, and complain of " the votes of men who do 
not belong to the Society, and do not worship there ! " When 
you wrote that, did you not know that Samuel Curtis and Henry 
D. Gray held deeds of pews which they did not own ? and still 
you speak of them as original proprietors and worshippers in the 
Society, and men who had been proprietors "from ten to sixteen 
years." They were, to be sure, original petitioners, but they had 
both left the church with their families, years before. One of them 
worshipped in Rev. Mr. Robbins' Church, Hanover street, and one 
in the Brattle Street Church, both Unitarian. But still you say 
that none of your friends from. other societies had anything to do 
with your call, or voted at the time. 

Now sir, you cannot plead ignorance in this case, for you 
knew these facts at the time ; and allow me sir, in this connection, 
to ask, if you do not now own the pews which stand in the names 
of Samuel Curtis and Henry D. Gray 1 



16 



2d, You say you 

" Came, in the second place, because it was the wish of the Church, 
not one dissenting. It afforded me no small satisfaction, and aided me 
materially in making my final decision, to receive from the Church a 
letter, enclosing a copy of the vote, passed unanimously, ' that its mem- 
bers fully and cordially concurred with the Society in the engagement 
into which it had entered for my settlement.' And was not this a 
weighty reason why I should come, when the Church unanimously re- 
quested it ? For my own part, it weighed much in the decision I was 
called to make." 

Let us look at this reason for a moment, and see how it 
stands. Did you not know hoiv the vote was passed unani- 
mously ? Do you not know that this was effected by manage- 
ment ? Do you not know that it was opposed by the senior 
Deacon in the church, who was one of the most influential mem- 
bers of the corporation, and one of the most active in causing 
the erection of the house, a man venerable for his age, and much 
respected for his piety ? Did he not object to it, but decline 
voting, on the ground that the Society had already entered into 
an engagement with you, and that you had consented to come, 
and that if his vote would make any difficulty he would not now 
vote against you, though he had done so, as a proprietor, the 
Sunday previous ; not on the ground of personal objections, but 
on the ground that you was of a different denomination, and did 
not belong with them, and that in calling you they acted in bad 
faith towards their associates ? 

The following is the vote of the church which has been re- 
ferred to, viz : 

" The Society with which this church is connected, having invited the 
Rev. F. T. Gray to assist our present Pastor — The following resolve 
was offered by Dea. Wm. Sparrell : Resolved, That this Church 
fully and cordially concurs with the Society in the engagement 
into which it has entered with the Rev. Frederick T. Gray to become 
associated with our present Pastor in the ministry of this Church and 
Society. Which resolve was unanimously adopted, not one voting 
against it. A true copy from the Church Records, 

» GEORGE W. HOLLIS." 

This was in the afternoon of the 3d of November. And now, 
as you seem to rejoice that these things are matters of record, if 



n 



you will turn with me to your Appendix, Note H, you will see that 
your call was voted Oct. 27, (misprinted in your Appendix, 29,) 
and that your answer accepting the same was read on the 3d of 
November following. By the above copy of the records of the 
church meeting, which was held in the afternoon after service, 
we see that the Church did not act on this matter till after your 
final answer accepting the call of the Society had been read to 
the congregation worshipping in the church in Bulfinch street. 
Your letter, unfortunately, has no date, so that it is impossible 
to tell when it was written ; but it is certain that it was read in 
the Standing Committee assembled on Sunday morning, Nov. 
3d, previously to the morning service. 

With these facts before you, and a " matter of record " too, 
will you stand in the house of God, and pretend that you was 
influenced on the first or second of November, 1839, by acts 
which did not occur till the third of the same month, and that 
you was " aided materially " in making your " final decision " 
(which had already been promulgated to the Church and Society, 
before the Church took any action on the matter at all) by acts 
which were then future, and consequently known only to God ? 
Did you feel when you penned this reason for your coming, " that 
the great interests of truth and righteousness required a 
sacrifice on your part ? " Cannot the cause of truth be sub- 
served without the sacrifice of truth itself? Will you undertake 
to sustain truth by the sacrifice of truth ? 

I had hoped that such morality was confined to the dark ages, 
when the corrupt ministry of a degraded church gathered the fruits 
of it, in the sale of indulgences for the commission of all manner 
of crimes, and justified itself by the allegation that the interests 
of the church required it. And will you adopt, in the nineteenth 
century, the exploded doctrine that " the end justifies the 
means ? " 

3d. You say that " the third reason for your coming was be- 
cause our Pastor desired it." 
3 



Of the truth of this reason I have no doubt, and we have 
already seen that you had fully bargained with him on the sub- 
ject of "his flock," before the subject was broached to the So- 
ciety ; and singular and unusual as it may be, we see that on the 
27th of October, 1839, he announced to the Society, not that 
he desired " a colleague," but that he desired you to be called 
in as a colleague, at the same time giving them to understand 
that he had completed the bargain with you on the best of 
terms, and that your coming " would not add to their pecuniary 
burdens." In order to accomplish this, he had caused to be 
transferred all the pews of which he had control, to individuals 
who would vote as he directed ; thus setting at defiance not 
only the laws of the land, but also the by-laws of the Society, 
which provide that no person shall have more than one vote. 
Perhaps in connexion with this, I might attend to some more of 
the reasons why you came, given under your first head, and 
which you have undertaken to substantiate by a letter from the 
Treasurer of the Society. Your " Sermons " were preached 
November 29th, and the Treasurer's note is dated December 1st, 
which shows that you made the statement and then obtained 
from him documentary proof of what you had previously stated ; 
and I shall therefore hold you no less accountable than him, for 
the truth of what you have published. I here insert two notes 
of the Treasurer in reply to you, one of them containing an 
analysis of the votes given at the time of your call, on the 27th 
of October, 1839, as I shall have occasion to refer to them in 
connexion with each other. 

"APPENDIX A. 

« Boston, Dec. 1, 1841. 

"To Kev. F. T. Gray: 

" Dear Sir, — In reply to yours of the 27th ult., 1 would state that the fol- 
lowing appears, by the Treasurer's books of the Bulfinch Street Society, 
in my possession, to be the number of the proprietors, and the length of 
time they have been such, who voted when the invitation was given you 
October 27, 1839: 

"Of the twenty original petitioners for the act of incorporation in 
1822, now living, fourteen voted in the affirmative. 



19 



" The whole vote stood thus, of those who voted on the question of your 
call: 

37 had been proprietors from ten to sixteen years, 
31 " " " " one to ten years, 



Yeas. 


Nays. 


23 




19 


12 


42 






3f 


17} 


21 


59 


50 



3 had been proprietors from six to twelve months, 
38 had been such within six months, 

109 

" Yours respectfully, 

"J. R. BRADFORD, 

"Treas. Bullfinch Street Society." 

"APPENDIX H. 

"Boston, Dec. 1, 1841. 

"To Rev. F. T. Gray: 

" Dear Sir,— In answer to yours of the 27th ult., I would say that none of 
your friends, from other societies, had any thing to do with your call, or voted 
at that time, as the books of the Society will show. Just previous to your call, 
eight pews in the South Gallery then belonging to the Society were sold to 
individuals, all of ivhom were worshippers in the house. 

" Your call was given October 27, 1839, and your answer, accepting the 
same, was read on November 3d following. On the 4th of November, 
eleven pews remaining unsold, belonging to the Society, were purchased, 
and have been and are occupied as follows : six by individuals who came 
there to worship with their families, and two of the pews are still occupied 
by the same families who have worshipped in them over twelve years. 
"Yours respectfully, 

"JOHN R. BRADFORD, 

" Treas. Bulfinch Street Society." 

"*Most of these subsequently not only acquiesced in the decision of the majority, but 
now attend with their families, and are among those whose attention and kindness will 
long be remembered by me.' 7 

"t These three persons were G. W. Bazin, Dec. 25, 1838 j B. B. Mussey, Jan 25, 
1839 ; Joseph H. Greene, Feb. 5. 1839." 

" % These seventeen individuals were, at the time, wholly unknown to me, and, with 
two exceptions, were worshippers in the Society. (See page 11.) F. T. G." 

I am not acquainted with all the worshippers in the Bulfinch 
Street Church, and am therefore unable to go into an examina- 
tion of all your statements in full ; but I know enough of the busi- 
ness to be convinced that the cause of " truth and righteousness " 
has in no wise been aided by this statement. Having obtained 
from the Treasurer a list of the proprietors of the Bulfinch Street 
meeting house, on the 27th of October, 1839, together with the 
yeas and nays on the vote for your call, I was unable to come to 
the result that you and he do on the subject, without making 
figures do what it is said they cannot do ; I therefore obtained 



20 



from him the names of the proprietors, as they are classed above. 
But to give both you and him the benefit of his own explanation, 
I here insert his note to me. 

"Boston, Jan. 12, 1842. 
"Sir, — I herewith furnish you with another list of the proprietors of 
the Bulfinch Street Meeting House, who voted on the question of the call 
of Rev. F. T. Gray, with the names classed under the different heads of 
10 to 16 years, 1 to 10 years, and 6 months or less. You will perceive by 
reference to my note to you of the 3d Last, that I therein stated that the 
date of the deed set against each name on that list was that of the pew 
held by him at the time of voting, but that many of them were proprietors 
at a much earlier date. 

" Yours, J. R. BRADFORD." 

By referring to this list I find that Samuel Curtis is put down 
as having been a proprietor from ten to sixteen years ; but by 
turning to the Treasurer's book I find that he became a proprie- 
tor on the 18th day of May, the day previous to the time of 
voting Mr. Dean his salary and the action on the report of the 
committee appointed to confer with Mr. Dean on the subject 
of exchanging with " Universalist clergymen." I also find that 
Henry D. Gray is put down as an original petitioner and a " pro- 
prietor from ten to sixteen years," when in fact he took a deed 
of a pew on the 26th of October, the day previous to your call. 
Neither Mr. Curtis nor Mr. Gray owned the pews of which they 
held the deeds, but had them transferred for the express purpose 
of voting. Mr. Dean himself paid for the pews, and was the 
legal owner of them, and they with many others were transferred 
at his direction. A pew was also transferred, Oct. 26, to Charles 
Woodbury, whom you put down as a proprietor from one to ten 
years. He did not own the pew, but received the deed by 
direction of Mr Dean. I instance these cases, not because they 
are the only instances of the kind existing ; but because they 
serve to illustrate the manner in which this whole business was 
accomplished. 

The facts in the case are, after it had been determined be- 
tween Mr. Dean, yourself, and the persons assembled in private 
caucus at Mr. Dean's house and other places, that you were to 



21 



be called as colleague with Mr. Dean, it was then found that 
some measures must be adopted to obtain votes for the final con- 
summation of the plot ; and the subscription was opened for the 
purpose of buying the eight cheap gallery pews alluded to by 
the Treasurer. 

The " Central Universal Society" had authorized the Standing 
Committee to sell the remaining pews of the Society as low as forty 
per cent, on their original appraisal, and the Standing Committee 
had authorized the Treasurer to sell them at the same rate. 

This subscription was opened and managed by Theophilus 
Burr, John Bolles, and some others, who raised the money in 
this way, and deeded the pews to individuals who were not pro- 
prietors, for the purpose of procuring votes for your settlement. 

It has been said, and I think with truth, that your friend, 
Deacon Lewis G. Pray, of the Rev. Mr. Barrett's church, was 
one of the most active in the matter, alleging that he would not 
take a pew himself till after the Society had called his " friend, 
Gray, " as it would not " look well ; " but after they had called 
him, it would then become a Unitarian Church, and there would 
be no impropriety in his coming in ; and his subsequent conduct 
fully corroborates all this. Had the t)eacon been as anxious to 
keep his conscience clear before God, as he was to preserve a 
good name before men, this controversy, in all probability, would 
have ended where it commenced. Will you, in view of these 
facts, say that " your friends from other societies had nothing to 
do with your call, " and tell of the original proprietors who 
voted for you ? As to the original proprietors, I am willing they 
should have all the influence their property in the corporation 
will entitle them to, and I do not consider their right as differ- 
ing in the least from those who have more recently become pro- 
prietors. Chancellor Kent says : " A corporation is a franchise 
possessed by one or more individuals who subsist as a body pol- 
itic under a special denomination, and are vested, by the policy 
of the law, with the capacity of perpetual succession, and of 
acting in several respects, however numerous the association 



22 



may be, as a single individual." And that, " the rights and 
privileges of the corporation do not determine or vary upon the 
death or change of any of the individual members. They con- 
tinue as long as the corporation endures. " If this is the true 
nature of a corporation, then all who are proprietors are equal 
in the eye of the law, at least as voters ; but what we of the 
minority most complain of, is a conspiracy to defeat the original 
intention of the corporation by means of those who were not 
proprietors. 

But let *me turn to the analysis of the Treasurer. I have 
already alluded to some pews transferred by Mr. Dean. If you 
look on the list of proprietors, you will find that of those who 
voted for your settlement, fourteen, or nearly one fourth part 
of the fifty-nine, had not been proprietors over forty-eight hours. 
Was this all accidental ? 

After referring to this analysis, will you undertake to say that 
your opposers were those who became proprietors a few months 
previous to your call ? But on this ground, if priority of pro- 
prietorship is worth any thing, they claim your respect, for they 
were proprietors previously to your coming. 

You say, on page 5, that " of the individuals who voted in 
the negative, twenty-one (nearly half of the whole number who 
thus voted) had not been proprietors in this house six months, 
eleven of whom were not even worshippers. " 

By referring to your Appendix A, I have looked in vain for 
any proof that those who voted against you, were " not even 
worshippers ; " but presume that from your intimations in your 
sermons, as well as what you have said in private, that you at- 
tach much of the blame to the three individuals named in your 
Appendix A, who had been proprietors from six to twelve 
months. As to the first individual named, Mr. George W. 
Bazin, he became a proprietor Dec. 25, 1838, and I believe you 
put him down as not a worshipper. Now, Sir, will you tell me 
where his family had worshipped for ten years previous to 
your " call ? " Were not his children members of the Sabbath 



23 



School connected with the Central Universalist Society, and 
did they net worship in that Church ? They surely did. 
The second individual named, B. B. Mussey, was, at the 
time of your call, a worshipper in the house. If these two 
individuals were not worshippers, why were you introduced to 
their families by Mr. Dean, as his parishioners? Mr. J. H. 
Green also informs me that he was a worshipper in the house at 
this time, and did not leave until about four months after your 
installation. But even if they had not been worshippers, they 
were members of the corporation, and of course must contribute 
to your support. And you will not deny to those who are 
bound to support you the right of voting on your settlement. 
On your 5th page, occurs the following assertion : 

"It was a source of no small satisfaction to find that the remonstrants 
to my installation were only nineteen, whilst those in favor, including the 
names of the oldest proprietors and worshippers in the Society, numbered 
sixty -nine ; and it is an important fact to be remembered, that four only 
of the proprietors, who were worshippers, have discontinued their attend- 
ance. [See Note B.]" 

The following is the remonstrance to which you allude, and 

the reader will at once judge whether the charges set forth in 

that document did not deserve some consideration from you, as 

well asjhe number who signed it. 

"PROTEST. 

" To the Ecclesiastical Council assembled to act in the matter of the in- 
stallation or ordination of the Rev. Frederick T. Gray, as asso- 
ciate pastor with the Rev. Paul Dean, over the Religious Society, now 
called the Bulfinch Street Society ; and to all whom it does or may 
concern. 

"The undersigned, members of the said Society, beg leave to object 
and enter their solemn protest against the installation or ordination of the 
said Gray, as an associate Pastor or otherwise over the said Society, and 
against all proceedings which have been had for that purpose. 

" Because, the said Society was originally formed for the sole purpose of 
supporting and maintaining the public worship of God, according to the 
religious creed and principles of that sect or denomination of christians, 
well known by the name of Universalists, and with a view to employ 
from time to time, religious teachers or pastors to preach the Gospel to 
the said Society, belonging to that sect or denomination of christians, and 
no others. And the said Society to that end was duly incorporated by 
an act of the Legislature of this Commonwealth, made and passed on 
the twenty-first day of January, in the year of our Lord eighteen hun- 
dred and twenty-three, by the name of the Central Universalist Society, 
with all the powers, privileges and immunities, to which other religious 



24 



societies in this Commonwealth are entitled, and accepted the said Act 
of incorporation ; erected a house for public worship for the said Socie- 
ty, in Bulfinch Street, and invited the said Dean to become their pastor 
and to preach the gospel to them in that place, with the views and the 
purposes aforesaid, and with and for no other end, intent or purpose 
whatsoever : — And the Rev. Frederick T. Gray, who is proposed to be 
installed or ordained as an associate pastor over the said Society, is well 
known and admitted to belong to another and different sect of christians, 
known by the name of Unitarians, and is proposed to be installed to 
preach and inculcate the doctrines of that sect to the said Society : — And 
the undersigned believe that the said Gray cannot be installed or ordain- 
ed as an associate pastor or otherwise over the said Society, without an 
open and direct violation of the rights, franchises, and immunities secur- 
ed to the members of the said Society by the said Act of incorporation, 
nor without a virtual annihilation of the said Society, which the under- 
signed believe it is not in the power of any member less than the whole 
of the said Society to effect. 

" Because, the said Gray has not been invited to become an associate 
pastor as aforesaid, pursuant to any vote of all the members of the said 
Society worshipping in said house in Bulfinch Street or even by a ma- 
jority of them ; but by persons many of whom belong to other denomi- 
nations of Christians worshipping elsewhere and differing from the reli- 
gious sect or denomination to which the Society incorporated aforesaid 
belongs, with the express intent and purpose of establishing and main- 
taining the public worship of God in the said house erected for the pur- 
pose aforesaid, according to the creed and principles of a different de- 
nomination of Christians, called Unitarians, and of excluding the mem- 
bers of the said Society who still belong to the denomination of Chris- 
tians called Universalists, from maintaining the public worship of God 
according to the doctrines and principles of their sect, in the house which 
they at great expense erected for that purpose. 

" Because, the said Gray has not been invited to become associate pas- 
tor as aforesaid by or pursuant to any vote of the said Society passed at 
any meeting legally warned or holden for that purpose ; — And the under- 
signed believe that it is provided by law, that nothing transacted at any 
meeting of any such Society shall have any legal operation or effect, un- 
less the subject matter thereof shall have been inserted in the warrant 
for calling the meeting ; and the subject of inviting the said Gray to be- 
come an associate pastor as aforesaid has never been mentioned or allu- 
ded to, in any warrant for calling any meeting of said Society. 

" Because, the terms of settlement upon which it is proposed to install 
or ordain the said Gray as an associate pastor over the said Society, are 
not authorized by any vote of the said Society, inasmuch as. a Standing 
Committee in this regard did not authorize them to invite the said Gray 
to become an associate pastor as aforesaid, unless it could be done with- 
out expense to the said Society: — And the said Committee have invited 
the said Gray to become an associate pastor as aforesaid, under an agree- 
ment that the terms of settlement shall be made satisfactory to himself. 

" Because, the Ecclesiastical Council called to act in the matter of in- 
stalling or ordaining the said Gray as aforesaid, have not been called in 
the way and manner established by usage in such cases, and do not be- 
long to the religious sect or denomination of Christians, whose doctrine 
the said Society was incorporated to support and maintain, and are there- 
fore not fit and proper persons to act in the matter aforesaid. And the 
letters missive which have been issued to certain Churches and Societies 
to assist in the matter aforesaid, have not been issued by the said Society, 
or according to the established usage in such cases, nor by any person au- 



25 



thorized to issue the same, and have been directed to Churches and Soci- 
eties belonging to a different sect or denomination of Christians from 
those whose doctrines and principles the said Society by their Act of in- 
corporation were bound to support. 

" Because, the said Ecclesiastical Council convened for the purpose 
aforesaid, has not been duly called by the said Society incorporated as 
aforesaid, nor by any one who by the by-laws thereof, or by any law or 
usage had any authority to call the same, but has been called by the said 
persons acting as a Standing Committee without any authority so to do, 
and whose doings therein have never been reported to, or confirmed by 
the said Society. 

" Because, the said Gray is proposed to be installed or ordained as an as- 
sociate pastor over the said Society contrary to the well established usage 
in such cases, before the said Society have had any opportunity of hearing 
him preach as a candidate before them, or any proper means of judging 
of his ability, qualifications and fitness, aside from his religious tenets, to 
become a religious teacher, preacher of the Gospel, and pastor over the 
said Society : — And the invitation of the said Gray to become pastor aa 
aforesaid, the undersigned believe has been given without due regard to 
the wise injunction of the great Apostle, which forbids the laying of 
hands suddenly upon any one. 

" Because, the undersigned believe that no religious minister or teacher 
can have or exercise that influence over his Society, which is absolutely 
necessary to the welfare thereof, unless he has been invited to become 
their pastor, by a fair, decided, and considerable majority of the mem- 
bers thereof, fairly, openly, and honorably obtained at a meeting publicly 
and legally warned, and holden for that special purpose : — And that the 
circumstances under which the said Gray has been invited to become the 
associate pastor of the Society, and is proposed to be ordained over them, 
are such as to forbid the smallest hope of his ever being able to unite the 
Society in the bonds of peace, or to have any salutary influence as a re- 
ligious teacher over them, or in any way to become useful, or promote 
the real welfare of the said Society. He will never be likely to be re- 
garded by his flock, as that good shepherd who has entered by the door 
into the sheep-fold, but rather as an hireling who has climbed up some 
other way. 

u Because, the proceedings of those by whose request the said Gray has 
been invited, and is proposed to be ordained over the Society, have been 
conducted with 6iich secrecy and want of good faith toward the said So- 
ciety, and with such utter disregard of the original purpose for which 
they were incorporated, as not only to render them ineffectual and void, 
but to reflect great discredit on all those concerned therein : — And the 
undersigned believe if the same be sanctioned by the said Council, they 
will have a direct tendency to bring discredit and dishonor upon the pro- 
fession of religion itself. 

" Because, in the proceedings before alluded to, the undersigned cannot 
see any of the operations of the spirit of the gospel which breathes peace, 
harmony and good will, but think they can plainly discern the baneful 
influence of that pharasaical and anti-christian spirit, which would com- 
pass sea and land to gain a proselyte. And, because, the proceedings by 
which the said Gray has been invited, and is proposed to be installed as 
an associate pastor over the said Society, are wholly irregular, unprece- 
dented, contrary to law and the usages in such cases established, and not 
calculated to advance the spiritual or temporal welfare of said Society.' 

Signed by Robert Ripley and eighteen others. 



4 



26 



You will remember that when this remonstrance was present- 
ed to the council, the proprietor who offered it stated that many- 
more signatures might have, been obtained to it, had it been 
deemed necessary; but already more had signed it than was at first 
contemplated, and that he had not signed it himself, though he 
agreed to every word of it. He also stated that the facts set 
forth in this Protest were what they depended on. 

If false ground had been taken and false charges had been urged 
against you, then they ought not to have weight, though signed by 
thousands, but if the allegations set forth in the Protest were true, 
then they were deserving of consideration, though they were sign- 
ed by but one individual. But you pass over all this, and only 
notice the number of those who signed it. The Rev. Mr. Gan- 
nett and Rev. Mr. Robbins, both members of your own council, 
took the same view of the case, and so stated in the council, 
and that unless some explanation or refutation of the charges 
was made, they could not vote to proceed with the installation. 
And the only vote that could be obtained from this council, or- 
ganized, as it seemed to be, to consummate what had been be- 
gun in the dark, was — " that this council are so far satisfied 
with the proceedings of this church, in relation to the call of 
Rev. F. T. Gray, that they are now ready to proceed to the pub- 
lic services of his installation." 

The Report of the council contains a kind of insinuation 
which is as unmanly as it is unjust, and shows that some of the 
council were more under the influence of sectarianism than of 
truth and justice. The following is the sentence alluded to : 

" Having attentively considered a document also presented in the 
name of nineteen individuals, remonstrating against the same, together 
with a document signed by sixty-nine individuals of the Society, approv- 
ing and confirming said invitation, have voted," &c. 

The insinuation is that the nineteen who remonstrated against 
your installation were not members while those who approved it 
were. 

Now the nineteen who remonstrated against your installation 
knew they were proprietors, and they did not suppose, after they 



27 



had declared that they were so in the document presented to the 
council, that any one would doubt it, and they would have felt it 
an indignity that the Treasurer of the Society should have been 
asked to certify that they were what they declared themselves 
to be — members. But not so with those who intend to com- 
mit a fraud. In this case, as in others of a similar nature, you 
will find all the legal forms, and a kind of exactness in all docu- 
ments relating to their transactions, which seem to indicate that 
there can by no possibility be any mistake. So with those who 
signed the document approving your call. Had they all been 
proprietors, they would never have asked the Treasurer to cer- 
tify the fact, until their proprietorship was doubted. 

Of the sixty-nine who signed the document to which I have 
alluded, more than one fourth of them were not proprietors at 
the time. By turning to your Appendix H, you will find by 
the Treasurer's note to you, that on the 4th of November, eleven 
pews remaining unsold belonging to the Society were purchas- 
ed, he. 

I know not why the Treasurer states that these pews were pur- 
chased on the 4th of November, for you will remember that he 
says in the same note to you, that your call was given October 
27th. 

On the Monday morning after this, I called on the Treasurer, 
when the following conversation in substance took place. 

Mr. M. — Mr. Bradford, will you tell me what pews now be- 
long to the Society — and what the price of them is ? 

Mr. B. — The Society does not own any pews now ; they are 
all sold. 

Mr. M. — When were they sold ? 
Mr. B. — Last week. 
Mr. M.— Are they all paid for ? 
Mr. B. — They are not. 

Mr. M. — Are you authorized to sell them on credit ? 
Mr. B. — I am not. 

Mr. Ms — Why then are they not paid for ? 



28 



Mr. B. — I have not yet had time to make out the deeds. As 

soon as the deeds are made they will be paid for. 

Mr. M. — Who engaged these pews last week ? 

Mr. B. — Different individuals. I do not recollect all their 
names. 

Mr. M. — Did these individuals all call on you, or did one 
man engage them all at one time for these different individuals. 

Mr. B. — Theophilus Burr engaged them, but he did not give 
me the names of the persons to whom I should deed them until 
this morning. . 

"I hereby certify, that on the 28th day of October 1839, about eight 
o'clock in the morning, I accompanied B. B. Mussey, at his request, to the 
office of John R. Bradford, Esq., for the purpose of witnessing the con- 
versation between them as to the Pews of the Bulfinch Street Church. 
When the above conversation in substance took place, I was at that time 
one of the Standing Committee of said Society. 

(Signed,) WYATT RICHARDS." 



This conversation took place about eight o'clock on the Mon- 
day morning after the vote to call you had been taken, and previous 
to the letter communicating the same to you having been sent. 

I now propose to inquire who purchased these pews. Were 
they ivorshijpjfers in the house ? for we see the pews were en- 
gaged before you was called. I will give you the names of 
the purchasers, and see if you can recognize among them any of 
your " friends from other societies." 

No. 9. Franklin Brooks, from Pitts Street Church. 
" 25. A. J. Richardson, from Dr. Lowell's Church. 
" 27. Deacon Lewis G. Pray, from the Rev.. Mr. Bar- 
rett's Church. 
" 52. George W. Hollis, from Pitts Street Church. 
" 53. Francis H. Gray, a relative of yours. 
" 57. S. G. Simpkins, from Pitts Street Church. 
" 81. R. W. Bailey, from Rev. Mr. Robbins' Church. 
" 88. Abial Strange, from Pitts Street Church. 
No. 1 . South Gallery, D. R. Chapman, your brother-in- 
law, from Federal Street Church. 



29 



No. !. North Gallery, Edward Stearns, from Pitts Street 

Church, and formerly your Clerk. 
" 85. Theophilus Burr, one of the Standing Committee of 
the Bulfinch Street Church, and one of the Committee who 
waited on you from the private caucus. 

Now, Sir, will you look at the names of these individuals, and 
tell me if they were worshipers in the Bulfinch Street Church, 
or are they all so now. 

As we have already seen, they had engaged the pews previ- 
ous to your call, and, as the Treasurer said on the 28th of Oc- 
tober, were ready to pay for them as soon as the deeds could be 
made out. But we see by the following vote of the Standing 
Committee, passed after the pews were contracted for, that it 
was matter of concert between your friends and the Standing 
Committee to obtain these pews on a credit, and not to become 
actual proprietors until twelve months from the date of their 
contract. 

" Tuesday evening, Nov. 5th, 1839. 

" Voted — That the Treasurer be directed to settle with the persons who 
have bought the pews lately belonging to the Society on the following 
terms viz :— one quarter cash, one quarter in three months, one quarter in 
six months, and the balance in twelve months, with interest — the deeds 
not to be given until the last payment be paid." 

Was Lewis G. Pray, or D. R. Chapman, your brother-in law, 
worshippers in this Church at the time referred to ? You know 
they were not. Yet you will find these men at the business 
meetings, though not at the Church during the Sabbath. Your 
own brother-in-law, D. R. Chapman, you will always find the 
most active and furious of any of the proprietors, " dealing out 
threatenings " against all those who oppose you, and even shak- 
ing his fist in the faces of those who dare to question the pro- 
priety of your course. Thus endeavoring to prove his brother 

" orthodox, 

By apostolic blows and knocks." 

I have already remarked that your council seemed organized 
to consummate what had been begun in the dark. Now if we look 
at the names of proprietors who agreed to become so previous to 



30 



the 28th of October, we find that two of them were members of the 
council which installed you ; and in this position they sat as im- 
partial men to hear and judge of the reasons for and against your 
settlement, and to act between you and the Society. D. R. 
Chapman, your brother-in-law, a delegate from Federal Street 
Church, signed the paper in favor of your installation, presented 
to the council of which he was a member ; and Deacon Lewis 
G. Pray, a delegate from Rev. Mr. Barrett's Church, was also a 
proprietor in the Bulfinch Street Church, yet he was one of the 
council who installed you ; one of those impartial judges who "at- 
tentively considered a document presented in the name of nine- 
teen individuals remonstrating against the same." "What would 
you and what would the public say of an individual who should 
sit as a juryman in his own case ? Do you think when these mat- 
ters are brought before a legal tribunal for adjustment, as in all 
probability they will be, these men will be allowed to sit as im- 
partial judges in the matter ? Our civil tribunals are not to be 
thus trifled with ; and I regret that an ecclesiastical council could 
be found so much under the influence of sectarianism as to allow it. 

On page 5, after considering the reasons for your coming, you 
ask, " in societies generally is there greater unanimity than this ?" 
Can you name an instance in this city or elsewhere, in which a 
pastor has been settled by so small a majority as 59 to 50, and 
that too when he had not preached for them as a candidate, and 
was to come " without compensation ? " Surely you must be 
grateful for small favors ! 

You then proceed to vindicate yourself from the ■ charge of 
" perverting this house from its original design." You say, 

"Much has been said by some persons abroad, as if this house had 
been perverted from its original design. My hearers, if we calmly, and 
with candid minds, consider this whole matter, and understand the facts 
as they really are, we shall find that there is no foundation, in any respect, 
for the charge, much less in connection with the call that was given to 
me. The facts are simply these. The original proprietors of this church 
withdrew from their former place of worship, and erected a building here 
for their own use and that of their pastor. From almost the first, this 
movement was not regarded with favor by those who bore a similar 
name, but who advocated a faith somewhat different. The distinguished 
leader of the Universalists in this city took no part in the services of the 
dedication of this house, in May, 1823. A preacher of the order of Res- 



31 



toraticraists, from New York, took the leading part in the services of that 
occasion. These services were slightly passed over, or not noticed at all, 
by the press of that denomination. Their leader has at no time, I have 
been informed, preached in this pulpit. " 

The impression here given of the withdrawal of the original 
proprietors from the First Universalist Society in this city, is, 
to say the least, deceptive. The proprietors who withdrew 
from their former place of worship did not do so on account of 
any disagreement in doctrine or in fellowship, but for the rea- 
sons set forth in the preamble to their subscription paper, which 
I here insert : 

"Boston, July 7th, 1822. 

"From a sincere conviction that it will advance the interest of Divine 
Truth, and promote the best good of society in this city, we are desirous 
that a Society of Universalists should erect a new and elegant meeting 
house in a central and convenient situation in said city ; therefore, in the 
hope that the First Society generally and many others will cordially join 
us in this good work," &c. 

Does this look like want of fellowship in those separating 
from the old Society ? When those proprietors originally 
separated from the First Society in this city, and built the 
" Central Universalist Meeting House, " they had no more idea 
of separating in fellowship from the old Society, than you had 
of maintaining that fellowship when you became their pastor. 
They continued as members of the First Universalist Church 
and Society till their house was completed, and then they with- 
drew and invited Mr. Dean to become their pastor, which invi- 
tation he accepted, and was installed in May, 1823. 

The following is the request of Mr. Dean and of the other 
members of the First Universalist Church to be dismissed from 
it, and will serve to explain what their motives were at that time, 
and may perhaps be as good authority as your assertion is at 
this late day. It is taken from the records of the First 
Universalist Church. 

"To the First Universalist Church in the City of Boston: 

"Beloved Brethren and Sisters, — It having pleased Divine Providence 
so to prosper the cause of truth, and so to multiply faithful believers in 
our city, that to continue the progress of truth among us, as well as for 
individual accommodation, it has been deemed expedient to erect a new 



32 



Meeting House in Bulfinch street, and gather therein a Church and So- 
ciety to be known by the name of the Central Universalist Church and 
Society. 

"And we the subscribers, members of your church and communion, 
and having always lived in perfect fellowship with you, feeling it to be 
our duty to unite in the formation of said church, do hereby request a 
dismission from your particular watch and care in the Lord ; that we 
may thus extend the benign influence of our holy and benevolent religion 
for the best good of men, and the glory of God our Saviour. 

" Brethren and Sisters in the Lord ; we do not separate from you in re- 
gard to fellowship, faith, or esteem. It was with you we first saw the 
light of salvation, and tasted of heavenly joys in the blessed Saviour of the 
world. We shall always esteem you as the parent church in this place, and 
ourselves only as a branch, ardently pursuing the same course, engaged in 
the same heavenly employment with you ; as such, therefore, we shall ever 
pray for your prosperity and growth in divine grace and love, and ask 
your fellowship and prayers for us, your affectionate brothers and sisters 
in the Lord." 

The above is signed by Levi Hawks, Isaac Dupee, Samuel 
Gray, Paul Dean, and thirty-six others, all originally members 
of the First Universalist Church in this city. 

Yon say, " the distinguished leader of the Universalists in 
this city " (alluding no doubt to Rev. Hosea Ballou) " took 
no part in the dedication of this house, " which assertion is true. 
But, Sir, did you give " all the facts in the case ? " You leave 
the reader to infer that this was from other than personal con- 
siderations ; that it was from a want of fellowship in doctrine or 
religious sentiment, which was not the case. 

Mr. Ballou, when settled in Salem, Mass., and in Ports- 
mouth, N. H., and for some time after he came to Boston, was 
in the habit of exchanging with Mr. Dean, who was then pastor 
of the First Universalist Society in this city, as often as their 
distance from each other would allow, and no one ever heard 
any complaint of any want of fellowship until some time after 
Mr. Ballou came to this city, when some personal difficulty 
arose between them, which has continued, I believe, to the 
present time. This will show the reason why Mr. Ballou took 
no part in the installation. But when Mr. B. was installed over 
the Second Universalist Society in School street, Mr. Dean had no 
scruples about taking the leading part in installing him as a Chris- 
tian minister, and he cannot now say he did not then know his 



33 



sentiments, for they were then fully published to the world, and 
he has never attempted to conceal or disguise them. To show 
you in what light Mr. Dean then considered Mr. Ballou, I will 
here insert some extracts from his part of the services on that 
occasion. 

"Address to the Pastor Elect: 

"Rev. and Dear Sir, — With peculiar satisfaction do I receive you as 
one, come to second my feeble efforts to testify the Gospel of God's uni- 
versal grace in this metropolis. Most sincerely do I felicitate you on the 
solemn and interesting connection you are about to form with this Church 
and People, by being publicly installed their Pastor in the Lord. Your 
lot has been cast you in a pleasant place, and I trust God has, and ever 
will give you here a goodly heritage. You have the happiness to com- 
mence your ministerial duties here, not ouly with mature and tried tal- 
ents, and a thorough knowledge of the holy scriptures, but to bring with 
you into the ministry an extensive acquaintance with the human charac- 
ter, and ample experience in the duties you are to perform, which are 
happy presages of your success. 

"Fellowship of the Churches to the Pastor: 

" My Brother, — Having from the commencement of your ministerial 
life, enjoyed the esteem and confidence of your brethren, and fellow-labor- 
ers in the ministry, and being now about to commence the functions of 
the Pastoral office with this Church and People, we avail ourselves of 
the opportunity hereby offered, to make you a renewal of our fellowship 
as such. Therefore I now affectionately present you with this Right 
Hand, the significant token of our confidence, esteem and fellowship ; 
which we pray you, Dear Sir, to accept, as the pledge of entire confi- 
dence in your abilities, and integrity, for the faithful discharge of the 
important services with which you have been solemnly charged, and the 
assurance of sincere affection for you as a fellow servant in the vineyard 
of our common Master. By this we promise to rejoice in your prosperi- 
ty, and to sympathize with you in the event of any adversity. For you, 
and the people of your care, shall we offer unceasing prayers, and gladly 
render you every assistance in our power; and we cherish the fond hope 
of a prompt return of these kind offices, that these sentiments and feel- 
ings may be forever mutual. May you, my Brother, late, very late in 
life, when you have joyfully finished your course, done, and well done, 
your work here below, be called to participate the joys of the just made 
perfect, and rest with your Saviour in glory. " 

"To the Church: 

"My Beloved Brethren, — Having given to your Pastor the Right 
Hand of Fellowship, we now extend our Christian Fellowship to you as 
the followers of Christ, and joyfully welcome you as a new member of 
the household of the faithful ; having the same precious faith with our- 
selves, the same glorious hope of eternal life, and the same ineffable joy 
in the prospect of the restitution of all things to holiness and happiness. 
Brethren, we pray that you may walk together in the unity of the spirit, 
dwell in the bonds of peace, and increase with the increase of God. 

" Greatly would it have rejoiced the heart of that great and good man, 
under whose ministry you long sat with delight, could he have lived to 
5 



34 



see the transactions of this day ; but his work was done, and he is gone 
to be with Christ, which is far better. Yet I may suppose his ransomed 
spirit is now witnessing the solemnities of this occasion, and rejoicing in 
the prosperity of those whom he loved, and for your encouragement say- 
ing, 'Be faithful unto death, and have a crown of life, that you may at 
last join me in the fellowship of the Church triumphant, where we shall 
never, never more be separated. ' Amen. " 

And when Mr. Dean was installed as pastor of the " Central 
Universalis t Society, " Rev. Sebastian Streeter, now pastor of 
the First Universalist Society in Boston, then of Portsmouth' 
N. H., took part in the services and made the installing prayer, 
as you will see by the following note : 

" Dear Sir, — In reply to the inquiries in your note of the 26th instant, 
I would remark, that I was present at the Dedication of the Central 
Universalist Church in this city, aud the Installation of the Rev. Paul 
Dean, as pastor of the Society which erected it, in 1823 ; and that I per- 
formed several parts in the solemnities of that occasion, one of which, if 
my recollection serves me correctly, was the installing prayer. 

" I was invited to attend as a Universalist clergyman, by gentlemen who 
styled themselves, 'The Committee of the Central Universalist Society of 
Boston ; ' and all the members of the council were open and avowed 
Universalists. 

" Why the Rev. H. Ballou, of this city, had no part assigned him in 
those services, I do not know ; but I understood at the time, and still be- 
lieve, that it was on account of some personal difficulties between him 
and the Rev. Mr. Dean. 

" That the omission originated in a difference of religious sentiments 
I heard not the slightest intimation at the time, nor till quite recently ; 
neither do I believe that it did, for had such been the fact, I should 
myself have been denied a seat in the council, as my religious opinions 
or certain controverted points of doctrine were known to differ as 
widely from Mr. Dean's, as did those of Mr. Ballou. 

"Respectfully yours, S. STREETER. 

"Boston, January 31, 1842." 

And now, Sir, if Mr. Dean had so far differed from Mr. 
Ballou in sentiment that he could not fellowship him on that 
account, would he have selected one to install him of the same 
heretical sentiments ? Surely not ; why then pretend it was 
on account of difference of sentiment that Mr. Ballou took no 
part in the installation service ? You either know what you 
have intimated is not true, or else you have not informed your- 
self on a subject which you attempt to decide, and are guilty oi 
a criminal neglect. 



35 



You say, a " preacher of the order of Restorationists, from 
New York, took the leading part in the services of that occa- 
sion." This statement surprises me much, as I should have 
supposed your own sagacity would have prevented you from 
falling into such an error. I know of no order of Christians 
known as Restorationists which existed previously to 1831. But 
if there existed such an order, Mr. Mitchell, the individual 
alluded to, was not one of them. He was colleague with Rev. 
John Murray (who may be considered the father of Universal- 
ism in this country) in 1810. In 1811 he returned to New 
York, from which place he had been called to this city, and 
Rev. Paul Dean was then called as colleague with Mr. Murray, 
who was then pastor of the First Universalist Society in Boston. 
Mr. Dean remained there till 1823, when he became pastor of 
the " Central Universalist Society " in Bulfinch street. The 
First Society then invited Rev. Mr. Mitchell to return to them, 
which he declined, as you will see by the following extract from 
a book, published by Mr. Mitchell, in 1833, entitled " The 
Christian Universalist. " 

"On his [Rev. Edward Mitchell] leaving Boston, the Rev. Paul Dean 
became his successor, as the colleague of Mr. Murray, and continued so 
till the death of Mr. Murray. Some time after this, the Boston Congre- 
gation divided, and a new house was built, which Mr. Dean was to occu- 
py ; and the old Congregation invited the writer to return to them; but 
his answer was, that as the people whom he served appeared to be satis- 
fied with him, and he had no reason to be dissatisfied with them, there 
could be no propriety in his leaving them. The writer was invited to 
attend, and officiate at the opening of the new house ; and did accord- 
ingly attend. It is a little remarkable that the chairman of the committee 
thus inviting him, had been chairman of the committee of the old house, 
at the time of his leaving Boston." 

Mr. Mitchell held no fellowship with the Restorationists as a 
denomination because they were mostly Unitarians while he was 
an ardent Trinitarian. 

You say in September, 1823, five months after the dedication 
of this house, Mr. Dean formally withdrew his connection with 
the Universalist denomination. And this is true. But what 
were the circumstances ? Was it on account of the want of fel- 



36 



lowship in sentiment ? If you knew the circumstances in this 
case, you are surely responsible for deceiving your readers ; for 
you must have intended the reader to understand that Mr. Dean 
withdrew from the denomination on account of a difference in 
sentiment, and you also evidently intended they should believe 
this separation was final. Dr. Paley says : " It is the wilful de- 
ceit that makes the lie ; and we wilfully deceive when our ex- 
pressions are not true in the sense in which we believe the hear- 
er to apprehend them." 

The facts in the case are, that at the " Convention of Univer- 
salists " held at Clinton, N. Y., Sept. 17, 1823, a complaint was 
preferred against Mr. Dean (" not by one who believed that all 
punishment was confined to this life ") for some misdemeanor, 
which complaint was not sustained, as may be seen by the fol- 
lowing extract from the records of the Convention : 

" The Council proceeded to the investigation of the complaint against 
Br. Dean — and after attending to the evidence — 

"Voted, to exonerate Br. Dean from the charges preferred in the 
complaint." 

Mr. Dean then requested permission to withdraw from the fel- 
lowship of the Convention, which request was granted. 

By referring to the minutes of the Southern Association of 
Universalists which met at Attleborough, Mass., in June follow- 
ing, (1824,) we learn that — 

" Br. Jacob Wood gave his assent to the article signed by Brs. Turner, 
Streeter and Hudson, at the session of the Association in December last. 
Br. Paul Dean assented to the same article, and agreeably to his request 
was voted into fellowship." 

The following is the article referred to : 

"Whereas certain publications, called an Appeal to the Public, and a 
Declaration to the World, have been construed to indicate a dis-fellowship, 
as expressed in a resolve of the Southern Association, the undersigned, 
authors of the Declaration, being possessed of a fervent desire to restore 
the happy union and fellowship of our religious order, and to enjoy our- 
selves, and to assist our brethren to reciprocate with us the inestimable 
blessings of harmony and brotherly love, desire to remove all difficulties 
above noted, by certifying that we do most cordially acknowledge and 



37 



accept, as christian ministers and brethren, such as differ from us on the 
subjects of doctrine, maintained in the above-named publications. And 
we receive and consider the acceptance of this proposal by the Associa- 
tion, as an assurance on their part, that they reciprocate the sentiments 
and feelings of christian fellowship above mentioned. 

"Edward Turner, 

" Barzillai Streeter, 

" Charles Hudson. 

" Voted, that the same is fully satisfactory to this Association, in relation 
to the signers thereof, and that this body reciprocate the christian feeling 
and fellowship, therein expressed." 

We see from this that Mr. Dean withdrew from the denomi- 
nation of Universalists in September, 1823, and that he joined 
it again, at his own request, in June, 1824. 

The following letter from the Standing Clerk of the General 
Convention of Universalists, will serve in some measure to 
show how far you have been mistaken in relation to the connec- 
tion of the Rev. Paul Dean with the Universalist denomina- 
tion : 

" Dear Sir, — Agreeably to your request, I have examined the records 
of the General Convention of Universalists in relation to the connection 
of Rev. Paul Dean with this body, subsequent to the year 1823, and I 
herewith communicate such information as I have been thus enabled to 
obtain. 

"At the session of the General Convention held in Hartland, Vt., in 
Sept. 1825, Rev. Paul Dean was present, and was chosen Moderator of 
the Convention. He was also chosen one of a Committee raised ' to de- 
liberate on the expediency of forming a Charitable Society for the pur- 
pose of raising a fund for the relief of widows and orphans of deceased 
brethren in the ministry of Universal Grace.' At the same session he 
was appointed, in connection with Rev. H. Ballou and Rev. E. Turner, a 
Committee to visit the Rockingham Association of Universalists. Dur- 
ing this session Mr. Dean delivered a sermon before the Convention from 
Acts xx. 28 : ' Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock 
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the 
Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.' 

" At the session of the Convention held in Wells, Vt., in Sept. 1826, Mr. 
Dean was appointed a Committee, with Rev. Thomas Whittemore and 
Rev. W. Skinner, to visit the New-Hampshire Association of Universal- 
ists, which met in June, 1827. He was also placed upon another Com- 
mittee at the same session. 

" At the session of the Convention held at Saratoga Springs, N. Y., in 
Sept., 1827, Mr. Dean was present, and opened the proceedings with 
prayer. He was one of the Clerks of the session, and was on a Commit- 
tee in connection with Revds. H. Ballou, 2d, S. Streeter and H. Ballou. He 
also introduced a Preamble and Resolution in relation to some alteration 
in the organization of the General Convention, which were unanimously 
adopted. He was appointed a Committee in connection with Rev. H. 
Ballou and Rev. D. Pickering, to visit the Association of Universalists in 



38 



the district comprising the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and 
Connecticut. 

" Mr. Dean was also present and took part in the proceedings of the 
Convention at its session in Winchester, N. H., in Sept., 3829. After this 
date I do not find his name in the Records of this body. 

" John M. Austin, 
" Standing Clerk of the General Convention of Universalists." 

On page 9th of your sermon the following occurs, viz : 

" In June, 1824, not fourteen months after the dedication, it was voted 
by the Society, ' that the pastor exchange with any clergymen of the 
Congregational order, in regular standing, who may request it.' This vote 
was cheerfully complied with, and the pastor subsequently, and down to 
the latest period, made exchanges with Congregationalists and Restora- 
tionists during the long period of sixteen years." 

You refer to Note D. in your Appendix to corroborate this 
statement. Here follows the note referred to. 

"Sunday, June 13, 1824. — At the request of the pastor from the desk, 
the Standing Committee met in the vestry after divine services this fore- 
noon. The Rev. Mr. Dean informed the Committee that he had been in- 
vited by the Rev. Mr. Rrimblecom. pastor of a society in Sharon compo- 
sed of Universalists and Congregationalists, to exchange clerical 
duties, and expressed his wish to know the opinion of the committee on 
the propriety of exchanging. The committee very generally expressed 
themselves in approbation of an exchange, and the following vote passed 
unanimously : 

« Voted, That the Rev. Mr. Dean be authorized to exchange with any 
clergyman of the Congregational order, in regular standing, who may 
request it. 

" A true copy from the records. 

"Edward Stearns, 
" Clerk of Bulfinch Street Society. 

"Boston Dec. 10, 1841." 

V 

" Boston, Aug. 15, 1824. — The Proprietors held their quarterly meet- 
ing this afternoon, after divine service. The meeting was called to order 
by the moderator, and the record for the quarter read. 

« Voted, To approve of the proceedings of the Standing Committee dur- 
ing the quarter. 

" A true copy from the records. 

"Edward Stearns, 
" Clerk of Bulfinch Street Society. 

« Boston, Dec. 10,1841." 

Now, Sir, the misfortune here is, that this proves too much. 
Do you suppose, if this Society were what you wish to prove, 
it to be, a Unitarian Society, that Mr. Dean would have asked the 



39 



permission or advice of his Society about an exchange with a 
clergyman of his own denomination ? Surely not. He was at 
this time in the practice of exchanging with the Rev. Mr. Street- 
er of this city. Do you find any evidence from the books of the 
Society that he asked permission of the Society to do so ? Mr. 
Balfour, who is perhaps the most ultra of all Universalists, and 
who may in fact be said to be the father of what is sometimes 
called " ultra Universalism," frequently supplied Mr. Dean's pul- 
pit for a long time after this ; and Mr. Dean's exchanges up to 
1831 were almost, if not entirely, confined to the denomination 
of Universalists, and were not entirely discontinued until 1836 — 
1837. In 1830, if I am not mistaken, Mr. Dean was absent 
at the South, and who was it that supplied his pulpit in his ab- 
sence ? Was it a Unitarian or a Congregationalist ? Surely 
not. It was supplied by Rev. Otis A. Skinner, now pastor of 
the Fifth Universalist Society in this city. Does this show that 
the Society had become separated from the denomination whose 
name it bore ? 

In 1824, the First Universalist Society in this city authorized 
its pastor to exchange with clergymen of good standing in any 
denomination who might request it. Was this a proof that the 
Society had abandoned its faith and become separated from its 
original associates? 

The following extract from a letter of the Rev Mr. Brimble- 
com,will show why he requested an exchange in 1824 with Mr. 
Dean, and of what denomination he considered him at that 
time. 

"You inquire what were the reasons of my exchange with Rev. Mr. 
Dean, in 1824. I answer, a part of my Society, being Universalists, were 
not contented to hear Unitarian preaching all the time, and desired me to 
make an exchange of pulpit services with some Universalist. I con- 
sented, and the result was the exchange of which you speak with Rev. 
Mr. Dean. Yours, very respectfully, 

" SAMUEL BRIMBLECOM." 

On page 10th, you inform us that, 

" In June, 1834, three and a half years before my call, a vote was passed 



40 



by the Church, altering its name. In March, 1838, nineteen months be- 
fore I was called, a vote was also passed by the proprietors, agreeing to 
petition the legislature for an alteration of the name of the Society, which 
petition was granted, and accepted by the Society, in May, 1838, sixteen 
mouths before my call. [Note E.] " 

Now as to the alteration in the name of the church, I do not 
know the circumstances, but am told that but few of the propri- 
etors are church members, which I believe is the case : The 
change of the name of the Corporation, from the use which you 
have made of it, and the proof you have adduced to substan- 
tiate it, deserves some more particular attention. The fact is, that 
some few, who wished to manage all the business matters of the 
corporation as well as those of the church, were continually anx- 
ious to make some change in the Society, attributing its want of 
prosperity in all cases to other than the true causes. In this 
instance we have no evidence that the meetings of the Society 
were legal meetings : but all who have looked into the matter be- 
lieve they w T ere not ; and I believe none are so well convinced 
of this fact as those who took the leading part in them. The 
subject was introduced at a meeting not called for the purpose, 
and it was referred to the Standing Committee to report on the 
subject, which they did, as may be seen by the following from 
your appendix E. 

"Sunday afternoon, Feb. 18, 1838. — The Proprietors held a quarter- 
ly meeting at the church, agreeable to notice from the desk, and were 
called to order. 

" The following written motion was submitted by Deacon William Spar- 
rell : 

" Moved, That a committee of three be appointed to consider the propri- 
ety of applying to the legislature for an alteration in the act of incorpo- 
ration of this Society so as to conform to the sentiments of the 
Society, and the name of the Church. 

"After the discussion of the foregoing, it was voted to refer the same to 
the Standing Committee (instead of a committee of three) for considera- 
tion, and report at as early a day as practicable. 

" A true copy from the records. 

" Edward Stearns, 
" Clerk of Bulfnch Street Society. 

"Boston, Dec. 11, 1841." 

"Thursday, March 18, 1838.— The Standing Committee held their 
monthly meeting this evening. The motion submitted to the proprie- 
tors at their last quarterly meeting, respecting a change of name for the 



41 



Society, was, as referred, called up and acted upon ; when it was " Voted, 
That it be recommended to the Proprietors that it is expedient 
to change the name, but would leave it with them to designate. 

"Voted, That a meeting of Proprietors be called, for consideration of 
committee's report in reference to change of name, on the third Sunday 
afternoon of the present month, immediately after the afternoon ser- 
vice. 

" A true copy from the records. 

" Edward Stearns, 
" Clerk of Bulfinch Street Society. 

" Boston, Dec. 10, 1841." 

" Sunday afternoon, March 18, 1838. — The proprietors held aspe- 
cial meeting, to consider the report to be made by the Standing Com- 
mittee in reference to alteration of Society's corporate name, which em- 
braces simply the vote as recorded amongst their doings at a meeting 
held by that body on Thursday evening, March 1, 1838, to wit : that it 
be recommended to the proprietors that it is expedient to change the 
name, but would leave it with them to designate. Upon this a discussion 
took place, when it was 

" Voted, That the report of the committee be accepted. 

" Voted, That an application be made to the legislature that the name by 
which we may be hereafter known shall be, Bulfinch Street Society. 

" Voted, That the Clerk be directed to prepare a petition and present to 
the legislature, in accordance with our wishes, as expressed in the fore- 
going vote. 

" A true copy from the records. 

"Edward Stearns, 
« Clerk of Bulfinch Street Society. 

"Boston, Dec. 10 1841." 

"Sunday afternoon, May 6, 1838. — The Proprietors, agreeable to a 
notification issued April 27th, attended a meeting at the church, were 
called to order. The clerk was then directed to read such part of the 
records as had reference to this meeting. He was then directed to read a 
copy of the petition, that was presented to the legislature of this Com- 
monwealth, for a change of the corporate name of the Society, and the 
act of the legislature granting the request, asset forth in said petition. 
The petition and act are as follows: 

" To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives, in General Court 
assembled : 

" Humbly shows that the proprietors of the Church and Society known, 
and as under their Act of Incorporation called, "Central Universalist So- 
ciety," worshipping at said church in Bulfinch Street, Boston, are desir- 
ous that the said name, as by their unanimous vote expressed, be chang- 
ed to that of the Bulfinch Street Society, for the reason that the term 
Universalist, as now theologically defined, expresses a meaning inconsis- 
tent with their principles of faith ; the Act of Incorporation to them be- 
ing in no other particular altered than in this petition proposed, — that of 
change of name to be hereafter known. As in duty bound will ever 
pray. 

" By order of the proprietors of Central Universalist Society. 

" Charles Cook, Proprietors* Clerk. 

" A true copy of the petition, as presented by me to the legislature March 
20, 1838. 

" Charles Cook." 

6 



42 



« COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. 

" In the year 1838. 

" AN ACT to change the Name of the Central Universalist Society. 
" BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General 
Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows : — The Cen- 
tral Universalist Society in Boston, incorporated in January 21, 1823, 
shall take the name of the BULFINCH STREET SOCIETY, when- 
ever said Society, at a legal meeting called for that purpose, shall so 
elect. 

" After reading the foregoing act, it was, on motion, 

" Voted, That, when the question on said act be taken, it be done by yea 
and nay, on written ballot. 

" The committee appointed to sort and count the votes reported that 
the whole number of votes given in were 32, 18 being yea and 14 nay. 
" A true copy. Edward Stearns, 

" Clerk of Bulfinch Street Society. 

If any doubt exists as to the legality of these proceedings, or 
of the opinion entertained by those who took the leading part 
in them, it must be dissipated by the following notice for a spe- 
cial meeting, called to confirm these doings, in October, 1841. 

"SPECIAL MEETING. 

" Notice is hereby given to the proprietors of pews in the meeting- 
house of the corporation formerly known by the name of the Central 
Universalist Society, and lately by that of the Bulfinch Street Society, 
that, a meeting will be holden in the Vestry of the meeting-house on 
Monday the 26th day of October current, at half past 6 o'clock, P. M. to 
take into consideration the general state of the affairs of the corporation ; 
to revise the records ; and to pass such votes as may be thought expedi- 
ent for the purpose of correcting and completing the same, and of con- 
firming the past doings of the corporation and of the Standing Committees, 
in reference to the acceptance of the act to change the name of the corpora- 
tion; and to the various alterations of the by-laws which have been 
adopted ; and to all other of the acts of the corporation and its officers or 
agents, appearing on the records, which it may be advisable to reaffirm 
and establish ; and to make such alterations in the existing by-laws, and 
enact such further by-laws and regulations, and elect such officers, and 
transact all such other business, as the interest of the corporation shall be 
thought to require. 

"By order of the Standing Committee, 

"EDWARD STEARNS, Clerk. 

" Boston, Oct 7th, 1841." 

Your Appendix E was introduced to prove what you stated on 
page 10, and it shows how necessary the second step in deception 
is when we have taken the first and are still indisposed to return 
to the " simple truth." And while you have introduced doc- 



43 



umentary proof in favor of your position which is formally endor- 
sed and signed "A true copy from the Records, Edward Stearns, 
Clerk," the reader will look in vain on the books of the Society 
for the original of this exact copy. We will here place side by 
side, the first vote taken on the Report of the Standing Com- 
mittee in reference to the alteration of the Society's corporate 
name, and the pretended true copy as "certified by the Clerk." 

" A true copy from the Records," As it stands upon the Records, 
by " Edward Stearns, Clerk." Voted, That the Report of 

Voted, That the Report of the the Committee be accepted, 

Committee be accepted. 19 to 11. 

Now you may say, and the reader may think, at first sight, 
that this is a small omission, and is of but little consequence. 
But you doubtless saw the bearing of it when you left out the 
number of votes in the first place. The reader will at once see 
that this can in no wise be considered as a fair test of the opin- 
ions of the Society. The whole number of pews in the house 
is 132, and the proprietor of each pew is entitled to one vote, and 
here are only 30 votes, being less than one-fourth of the whole 
number. Does this look like the voice of the whole Society ? 
Do you suppose, sir, this was done openly and legally 1 But 
this is not all. The most important matter is to come. By 
looking at the petition which the Clerk presented to the Legis- 
lature you will see that it is a direct fraud, for he there sets forth 
that the vote was unanimous, whereas less than two-thirds of 
less than one-third of all the proprietors voted for the measure. 
Yet the Clerk sets forth that the "Central Universalist Society 
are desirous that the said name, as by their unanimous vote ex- 
pressed, be changed." 

Now sir, was this true ? We see that only 19 voted to peti- 
tion for a change of name, and only 18 voted to accept the al- 
teration in the name of the charter after it was obtained. Was 
this unanimous 1 

I will leave it with you to suggest a name for such proceed- 
ings, and I doubt not you will deem silence "the best, and only 
true course to pursue," for you must have become convinced 



44 



ere this, that it is much easier to make a misstatement than it is 
to explain or conceal one. 

You then proceed to sum up the whole matter, and to give 
"the simple truth;" as though the whole controversy was ended 
by the extraordinary document you had produced, certified to 
be a "True Copy," by the Clerk whom you had "brought up in 
the way" you would have him go, and who, as we see, "did not 
depart from it." You say 

"The simple truth is, that various circumstances had separated this 
Church from Christian fellowship with those whose name it originally 
bore ; and by this vote the proprietors agreed to drop the old and adopt 
the new one, that would disconnect them in name, as in fact they had 
been in feeling, from a denomination with whom they did not fellow- 
ship. They, therefore, who had caused the erection of this house, their 
pastor consenting, had brought about a separation, and had entered into 
new ministerial associations, and with this change had adopted a new 
name. Was there any perversion in this? Have we not, in this free 
land, a right to change our ecclesiastical relations, and with it our name ? 
and that, too, without forfeiting our property, or subjecting ourselves to 
the charge of its illegal perversion ?" [Note F.] 

Your reasoning in this case is no more satisfactory than your 
" simple truth," which seems to have been so much perverted 
that no one would recognize it were not its name written over it, 
and notwithstanding this, there is some doubt whether it is not 
an old story with a new name. 

You argue as if the change had been made fairly and by the 
Society, when in fact it had been effected by a minority con- 
temptible in point of numbers, and that too by deception and 
fraud. 

I believe it to be a principle in morals as well as law, that 
no less than the whole of the proprietors in a corporation, either 
religious or monied, can change its nature and objects. Chan- 
cellor Kent says, " the rights and privileges of the corporation 
do not determine or vary upon the death or change of any of 
the individual members, they continue as long as the corporation 
endures." If this doctrine is true, and I believe it is the law of 
the land, then a majority have no right to change the object of 
any corporation and cannot do so without the consent of all the 
individuals composing it. Could a corporation, organized for 



45 



the purpose of banking, by a vote of the majority become an 
" insurance company," even by consent of the legislature ? 
Surely not. " I have invested my money in a banking institution, 
and I have a right to demand its continuance in such an institu- 
tion till I shall elect otherwise," would be the conclusive argu- 
ment of every member who should oppose such a change. So 
in a church, a man has invested his money with others in good 
faith in a corporation for the inculcation of what he conceives to 
be Christian truth, say Universalism, if you please. A house is 
erected and dedicated for this purpose according to the forms of 
that denomination, and a pastor is installed, and all things are 
conducted in good faith for a season. But in process of time, a 
change comes over a part of the members of the corporation, and 
a majority come to the conclusion that " Universalism " is not 
Christianity, but " Unitarianism " is ; therefore, say they, we 
will become Unitarian ; and they offer that much abused doc- 
trine that "the majority must rule," as a reason for their con- 
duct. The reason has no force in this case. The association 
in its formation was a bargain entered into by all the parties, with 
a full understanding of its object, and the majority have no 
more moral or legal right to violate it than have the minority. 

But you ask, " have we not, in this free land, a right to change 
our ecclesiastical relations and with it our name ? and that too 
without forfeiting our property, or subjecting ourselves to the 
charge of illegal perversion ? " This, at first view, may appear 
correct. But on examination it proves false, and destroys at 
once the moral as well as legal security of all our institutions. 
When a corporation is formed, it is done for some specific object, 
and that object must be kept in view by all the subsequent acts 
of the corporation ; otherwise they will be guilty of bad faith, 
and if one member of the corporation changes his views in rela- 
tion to the object of the association, so that he cannot act with the 
rest, he is bound to withdraw rather than pervert the property from 
its original design. All men have a right to change their views 
and their ecclesiastical relations, but they have no right to force 



46 



others into the support of them. Three men may associate to- 
gether to build a church ; they are all agreed that it shall be 
Unitarian. To-morrow two of them may hear Elder Knapp, 
and come to the conclusion that he has the " true doctrine and 
therefore, they being a majority, will vote to make it a " Baptist 
Church." The third pleads in vain that he assisted in good 
faith to build a " Unitarian Church," and thai he cannot in con- 
science give his means to the support, or attend on the ministry 
of the Baptist denomination, and he tells them if they have 
changed their opinions they are bound to withdraw, and if a sac- 
rifice of property is necessary, they ought to make it, and not 
oblige him to do so ; all have a right to change their opinions, 
and to adopt new views, but none have a right to appropriate the 
means of others, who may not be so clear-sighted, to support 
them. 

If your doctrine were correct it would open the door for fu- 
ture endless litigation and the grossest legal frauds. An asso- 
ciation may be formed to-day, an act of incorporation obtained, 
and a church erected, and dedicated to the worship of the Chris- 
tian's God ; to-morrow a majority may vote to change it into a 
Jewish synagogue, and the next day re-dedicate it as a Mahom- 
etan mosque. To all this the minority must not only submit, 
but must contribute of their means to support the new order of 
things. If this is either law or gospel, then our statutes are but 
a ''bill of abominations," and the New Testament a "dead 
letter." 

You say that in May 1838, " a motion was submitted to have 
the Pastor exchange with Universalists, and after discussion the 
subject was indefinitely postponed." Does this show that the 
Society was unanimous in the change it had made, and that all 
the disaffection was with a few ivho became proprietors in this 
Society within one year of your coming here. Surely you do 
not offer this to prove that point, and you cannot offer it to prove 
that the whole Society had become alienated and separated 
" from Christian fellowship with those whose name it originally 
bore." You then say that 



47 



"In April, 1839, a vote was passed, at the annual meeting of the pro- 
prietors, that a committee be chosen to confer with the Pastor respecting 
exchanges with Universalist ministers; and another, that the subject of 
the Pastor's salary be postponed to an adjourned meeting; but at the ad- 
journed meeting on May 19, of the same year, five months before my call, 
a report was made by that committee and accepted by the Society, by 
which the Pastor was relieved from such a disagreeable necessity, and his 
salary was continued." 

Does this show that the Society was unanimous in its change 
before you came, and had separated in fellowship from those 
whose name it bore. Surely not. By turning to your appen- 
dix G, we see that this vote which relieved the Pastor from the 
" disagreeable necessity " was adopted by 38 to 30, and this 
was effected, in part, by the transfer of pews owned by the Pas- 
tor, who had deeded them to individuals for the purpose of ob- 
taining votes to procure the acceptance of the committee's re- 
port and his own salary, which he, erroneously, no doubt, con- 
sidered in danger. 

On page 11 you remark that, 

"From these facts, it will be seen that it was the original proprietors, 
with their Pastor, who have earned forward this important work, step by 
step, going back eighteen years, until, the time having come when a col- 
league was desired by your Pastor, it was they, and they alone, (not one 
of my friends coming in, as has been asserted, [Note H,]) who invited me 
hither. And who but they, let me ask again, had this right? The ma- 
jority in all cases must govern ; and if they who erected the house, with 
their friends, felt it to be their solemn duty, as it was their right, to retain 
their control over it, and elect for themselves such a Pastor as they should 
prefer, and protect it against those from whom they differed most vitally 
in principle, who has any right to complain ? Where is the cause for 
censure ? Where, it may be asked, is the wrong?" 

This extract shows the conclusions at which you pretend to 
have arrived, in reviewing the past acts of the Society, and one 
knowing nothing of the circumstances would naturally conclude 
that the Pastor of this Society w r as so far superannuated that he 
was unable to attend to his duty, and that a colleague was nec- 
essary, whereas nothing could be further from the truth. He was 
between fifty and sixty years of age, vigorous and healthy, and 
as well able to preside at the altar from Sabbath to Sabbath, as 
any clergyman in this city. But it was a sectarian movement 



48 



altogether, and I know not whether the preliminaries were well 
understood between you and the senior Pastor or not, but there 
was a misunderstanding, surely, among your friends ; for Mr. 
Dean's friends supposed that you were invited to assist him. 
The resolution of the Church, which was passed some time 
after you had accepted the call of the Society, and which you 
say " aided you materially in making your final decision," is as 
follows : " The Society with which this Church is connected 
having invited the Rev. F. T. Gray to assist our Pastor" 
" Resolved, that this Church fully and cordially concur with the 
Society in the engagement into which it has entered with the 
Rev. F. T. Gray, to become associated with our present Pastor 
in the ministry of this church and Society." From this as well 
as from other circumstances, it will be seen that Mr. Dean's 
friends expected that you were coming as an assistant to him, 
and that you were to aid him, and this was a rational conclusion, 
considering that you were coming " without compensation." 

On the other hand your friends say that " it was understood 
in the outset that Mr. Dean was to leave, he having told you 
that if you did not come the " Universalists " would have the 
Church, and he would rather the Unitarians would have it than 
the Universalists. The fact that Mr. Dean left the Society about 
five months after your installation, and much having been circu- 
lated through the aid of your friends about a " call South," 
" where the climate would be more congenial to his health," 
shows conclusively that the bargain was consummated before- 
hand, or else the senior Pastor did not find his position as pleas- 
ant and " respectable " as he had imagined. 

As to the proof offered in your Appendix H, that u none of 
your friends from other societies had anything to do with your 
calls " the reader will judge. 

I will here insert the names of one third of the sixty-nine that 
signed the document presented to the Council which installed 
you, which, as you say, contained the names " of the oldest pro- 
prietors and worshippers in the Society," and you will see by 



49 



the dates at which they became proprietors, how much we are 
indebted to these " original proprietors and worshippers " " with 
their Pastor " for " carrying on this important work," until a 
" colleague was desired." 

The following will show the date at which each of these 
twenty-three members became proprietors, according to the 
Treasurer's list; and also the church at which they wor- 
shipped : 



Samuel Curtis, 


May 18, 


1839, Brattle Street Church, 


Benjamin Bradley, 


Oct. 


25, 


tt 


Rev. Mr. Rogers' Ch, 


Alpha Sawyer, 




25, 


it 


Bulfinch Street Ch. 


Nahum S. Wyeth, 


a 


25, 


tt 


Do. 


Robert E. Newman, 


tt 


25, 


tt 


Do. 


Darwin E. Jewett, 


tt 


25, 


a 


Do. 


John B. Bolton, 


it 


25, 


a 


Do; 


J. C. Lund, 


tt 


25, 


tt 


Do. 


Edward Roulstone, 


n 


25, 


tt 


Do. 


J. G. Gould, 


a 


26, 


a 


Do. 


Charles Woodbury, 


a 


26, 


tt 


Do. 


Henry Dean, 


tt 


26, 


tt 


Do. 


Thomas Goddard, 


it 


26, 


a 


Rev. Mr. Robbings Ch 


Robert Burr, 


tt 


26, 


a 


Do. 


Henry D. Gray, 


it 


26, 


tt 


Do. 


Franklin Brooks, 


Nov. 


4, 


tt 


Pitts Street Church. 


A. J. Richardson, 


a 


4, 


a 


Dr. Lowell's Church. 


G. W. Hollis, 


tt 


4, 


tt 


Pitts Street Church. 


Francis H. Gray, 


tt 


4, 


tt 


Brattle St. Church. 


R. W. Bailey, 


a 


4, 


a 


Rev. Mr. Robbins'sCh. 


Abial Strange, 


a 


4, 


a 


Pitts St. Church. 


D. R. Chapman, 


a 


4, 


tt 


Federal Street Church. 


Edward Stearns, 


tt 


4, 


tt 


Pitts St. Church. 



Does this show that " the oldest proprietors and worship- 
pers," and they alone, ("not one of your friends coming in"), 
" invited you hither ?" 

7 



50 



Was it in view of these " original proprietors" that you ex- 
claimed, " Our fathers, where are they ? " Can you look at 
this list, and then with triumph and exultation tell that " twenty- 
one, (nearly half of those who thus voted against you) had not 
been proprietors in this house six months, and eleven of whom 
were not even worshippers ? " Will you triumphantly point to 
the sixty-nine who signed the document in favor of your instal- 
lation after you had used every means in your power to obtain 
numbers, and after your friends had purchased nineteen pews of 
the Society, and then was enabled to get only three more than 
one-half the number of all the votes of the proprietors in the 
house, for your settlement, when you was to come without any 
te additional expense to the society ? " No wonder you ask, " in 
societies generally is there a greater unanimity than this ?" ! 

By looking at this list you will find that fourteen, or about 
one fourth of all those who voted for your call, had not been 
proprietors or held pews above 48 hours ; and this is a little re- 
markable, as the senior Pastor had not intimated to the Society 
that he wanted a colleague until the very day, yes, the very 
hour you was called. What I have said, in relation to the ex- 
tract from page 10 of your " Sermons," will apply with equal 
propriety and force to your reasons and conclusions in regard to 
the right of the majority. 

If we are to credit your assertions respecting your entire free- 
dom from sectarianism, we must regard your course as some- 
what novel. When you came into the Society, a new church 
creed was introduced, corresponding with those usually adopted 
in the Unitarian churches. To this some of the old members 
would not subscribe, and they were kindly permitted to retain 
the old one, rather than to " mar the happiness of this united 
Church." Surely no one can say that you are not liberal, for 
you have two church creeds ; if one will not suit, another may, 
and perhaps rather than lose a member, you might make a 
third. 

" You are no sectarian," but you write a letter to the Standing 



51 



Committee, requesting them to authorize you to represent this 
Society in the Massachusetts Convention of Congregational 
Ministers," because it had become a " regular Congregational So- 
ciety," and that too on the very day of the meeting of the So- 
ciety, because you dare not yet open that subject to the propri- 
etors. Still you are no sectarian ! you believe there are humble 
and pious Christians among every denomination, yet talk of the 
senior Pastor being relieved from the " disagreeable necessity 99 
of exchanging: with the denomination of Christians that installed 
him, and have supported him for more than a quarter of a cen- 
tury ; now paddling in the dirty pool of equivocation, and saying 
you was aided " materially" in making your " final decision " 
by an act subsequent to that "final decision!" — then stand- 
ing on your own dignity and adopting the words of Nehemiah : 
" I am doing a great work, and cannot come down." Still you 
are no sectarian, but 

" Half of one order, half another." 

You complain frequently of persecution, and that you have 
had much to endure since you came into this Society. You 
say, " every thing which could be said and done by a few who 
belong to other societies, and who were not worshippers here, 
that was calculated to injure and disturb us has been said and 
done ; and the press even has misrepresented our affairs." 
Now r 3 sir, these are grave charges, and should be made with 
great caution by one who claims to be led by the hand of the 
Christian's Master. When you say " a few who belong to other 
societies," whom do you mean ? Do you mean those who 
do not fellowship that iniquity which was practiced by you and 
others in endeavoring to place you where you now are, and who 
consequently cannot attend on your preaching ? If you do, then 
I confess I am one from another society, and though I occasion- 
ally hear you preach, I fear your preaching from that pulpit 
is calculated to awaken emotions similar to those which must 
have been awakened by the preaching of him who said to 



52 



our Master, " for it is written, he shall give his angels charge 
concerning thee," &c. Are not those individuals to whom you 
have alluded, proprietors, and do not you and your friends do all 
in your power to extort from these " worshippers in other socie- 
ties " your own support ? If they have no right to be heard in 
this Society, why is their property taxed, and why are they 
threatened with a sale of it, if they do not pay taxes assessed 
for your maintenance ? You are bound to answer these ques- 
tions before you complain of persecution. Have these " wor- 
shippers in other societies " gone out of their way to molest 
you ? Have they said aught against you except as to the man- 
ner in which you foisted yourself upon them, and demand from 
them your support ? Surely not. Why then talk of persecu- 
tion ? Do you expect by this to gain the sympathy of the pub- 
lic ? If you do, I fear you are doomed to bitter disappointment ; 
for I am sure no one will sympathize with you who knows the 
circumstances and the manner of your coming. If these indi- 
viduals became proprietors within one year of your coming, you 
surely cannot complain that they came to molest you, for it is a 
well known fact, that your coming was kept a secret until the 
day, yes, the very hour of your call. And this is what they 
complain of — that you were literally smuggled upon them. 
Even the senior deacon of the church knew nothing of your 
coming till one half hour before your call was voted. Still, 
when you are opposed, you talk of persecution, and compare 
your trials in this respect with those of your Master of old ! 
What mockery ! Have you not much more reason to sympathize 
with those to whom He said, " my house is a house of prayer, 
but ye have made it a den of thieves ? " 

On page 15, you make some attempt to explain the nature of 
the bargain with which you have been charged — viz : that you 
had bargained with Rev. Paul Dean for the occupancy of the 
pulpit of the Bulfinch Street Meeting House, and that you were 
to pay him as a consideration therefor the sum of $2,500, in 
yearly instalments of $500 each, provided the Society should 



53 



vote you the same sum annually for five years as they had pre- 
viously voted as a compensation to Mr. Dean. 

This is in substance, doubtless, the charge to which you allude, 
and the one from which you attempt to extricate yourself. 
You say, 

" It is a matter of great and just surprise, that the form in which this 
was necessarily done, assented to on my part as an act of accommodation 
to the Society, should have been made a subject of reproach against me, 
as unfounded as it is unkind and unjust. [Note K.] " 

You here manifest much surprise " that the form in which 
it was necessarily done," should have been made a subject of 
complaint against you. Now, sir, will you inform the reader 
why this "form" was necessary? The committee found that 
they could not legally carry this bargain into effect, without 
adopting this " form," and you with a wonderful spirit of accom- 
modation to the Society " assented" in order to accomplish what 
you had previously agreed upon. Did the Society propose this? 
Did they even intimate that they wished to make any considera- 
tion to Mr. Dean, on account of his leaving ? Oh no ! The 
Standing Committee, to whom was referred the subject " of the 
salaries of the pastors " make this report to the Society after 
they had conferred with you and the senior Pastor. [See Re- 
port in your Appendix J.] Does this look as if this was done 
by the Society, or by its Pastors and the Standing Committee ? 
No one will be at a loss to determine. But if we admit what 
you say on the subject, I do not see that you are in the least 
benefited. You speak of the " form in which this was necessa- 
rily done." Why was it necessary to adopt any other than a 
plain, straight-forward, business form ? If it was all correct, if 
the Society wished to make Mr. Dean a consideration of $500, 
they could do it, and do it equally as well without your assist- 
ance as with it. Do you suppose, if it was illegal for the Soci- 
ety to vote Mr. Dean $ 500, that they could bargain with you 
and vote you $500 with the express understanding that you 
should give it to Mr. Dean, and that this would be legal ? If 
you do, your ideas of the laws of our land would seem to be as 



54 



obtuse as your moral vision. This excuse places you in a much 
worse dilemma than your opposers charged you with. If you 
made a bargain with Mr. Dean to pay him a consideration for 
leaving the Society, you had a right to do so provided you did so 
from your own ample means. But you now place yourself in the 
awkward position of one conspiring with the Standing Committee 
of a Society, to obtain from it by a kind of legal fraud, or as you 
say, " the form in which this was necessarily done and assented 
to " by you " as a matter of accommodation to the Society," what 
this same Committee tell us could not be " legally effected " by 
fair and direct means. Does this, your own version of the mat- 
ter, make you appear in a more enviable position. You have 
not in this way been bargaining away your own means, but have 
joined hands with others to assist in obtaining from the Society 
what they either could not legally give, or else were unwilling . 
to give, and now you turn round and say to those from whom 
you have, by your own showing, been endeavoring to extort the 
" thirty pieces of silver," and say " it is a matter of great and 
just surprise that the form in which this was necessarily done " 
" should have been made a subject of reproach against me, as 
unfounded as it is unkind and unjust." 

But let us look at your Appendix I, and see how the matter 
there stands. The whole report is too long to be inserted en- 
tire. I will give, however, all that relates to this subject. It 
says : 

« It therefore was the desire of the committee, on learning the intention 
of Mr. Dean, to have proposed, as a mark of esteem and affection to him, 
that a certain sum be voted him by the Society. They fou.nd, however, 
much to their regret, that this could not be iegally effected ; they there- 
fore came to the conclusion to recommend to the Society to vote the same 
amount to Mr. Gray, for the year ensuing, as heretofore given to Mr. 
Dean. 

« In doing this, it gives them great pleasure to add, that, in conference 
with Mr. Gray, they found that he entered fully into the feelings of the 
committee, respecting the esteem and affection with which Mr. Dean is 
held by the Society, and that he will most cheerfully and happily appro- 
priate five hundred dollars to Mr. Dean, should the thirteen hundred dol- 
lars be voted him by the Society, [to be continued for five years.] 

"With these views, the committee would respectfully offer the follow- 
ing vote for the adoption of the Society : 

" Voted, That the sum of thirteen hundred dollars be given to the Rev. 



55 



Frederick T. Gray, as Pastor of the Bulfinch Street Society, for the year 
ensuing. 

" All of which is respectfully submitted. 

"J no. F. Banister, Chairman of Committee. 
"Boston, May 3, 1840." 

By looking at this matter we see that the $1300 were voted 
to you as Pastor for the year ensuing, but not that you might 
give $500 to Mr. Dean. They might have voted to him this 
sum, and voted you $800, and this would have been only $1300. 
And the Society could have given it as they intended as well as 
to have voted it all to you, with the express understanding that 
$500 was to be given to another. This is equally illegal, and 
since you have exposed the trick, it will doubtless have some 
influence in the final settlement of the matter. 

It is a matter of "great and just surprise " to me that you, in 
introducing documentary evidence in proof of your own position, 
should have been guilty of an interpolation which is as unjustifi- 
able as forgery itself. By looking at the above extract from 
your Appendix, purporting to be a report from the Standing 
Committee to the Society, you have supplied the words enclosed 
in brackets, viz : " to be continued for five years," which inter- 
polation forms no part of the original report, and is not to be 
found on the records of the Society, and any one who reads the 
report will at once see that no such intention was manifested in 
the report ; for the Committee had come to the conclusion to 
recommend to the Society to vote the same sum to Mr. Gray for 
the year ensuing as has heretofore been given to Mr. Dean. Does 
this look like an intention to vote Mr. Dean $500 a year for 
five years ? 

Another reason why this could not have been the understand- 
ing of the Society is, the minister's salary is voted every year, 
and if this had been done at that time for five years, why do 
they meet in April annually, to vote your salary ? 

You say much of the harmony of the Society and of the 
Church, and that all is union in the Church among the worship- 
pers, in the Sunday School, &c. Now, sir, do you suppose that 



56 



those who oppose you as a matter of principle, will condescend 
to molest you or your hearers on the Sabbath, or in the Sunday 
School ? Surely not. They will oppose you in all proper and 
legal ways, but you or your friends will find yourselves entirely 
unable to provoke them into any known violation of either the 
precepts of morality, or of the laws of the land. They look 
to the law for protection, and they are unwilling to break down 
the only barrier that seems capable of protecting them against 
the unprincipled invasions of lawless men. They act from 
higher motives, and they had much rather fail in any enterprise 
than succeed by dishonorable means. If we are right, as we 
sincerely think we are, we believe we shall succeed, and it is 
with us a matter of principle. We shun not the light, we are 
ready at all times to have a fair investigation of all our doings, 
and of all the means we have used to accomplish our purposes. 
We avoid not the investigation of any of our doings in a moral 
or legal view, and by the light of the moral and the civil law, we 
intend to pursue our course, until those who may have witnessed 
the controversy shall acquit or condemn us. If we are right we 
shall succeed. If we are wrong, I hope we shall not. When 
we are convinced that we have violated the laws of the land, 
and that justice and truth have forsaken our cause, then we will 
yield to you that support which you seem so much to covet, and 
sit quietly under your preaching ;but till then we shall look upon 
you as one who has secretly conspired, by dishonorable means, 
to defraud the rightful owners and worshippers of the " Central 
Universalist Church " of their property in their house of 
worship. 

But, sir, how is it with you, and those who profess to be your 
friends. When you by the advice of counsel became convinced 
that the course you had pursued was wrong, did you abandon 
it ? No. You called a meeting to re-establish and re-affirm 
your proceedings. The notification for the meeting, and the 
subject set forth in it, are enough to convince any man that the 
whole course was iniquitous in the extreme. 



57 



This meeting was called for the purpose of re-affirming what 
had been done previously, and to effect a kind of legalization of 
the transactions of previous meetings, which could not be legally- 
called, as it would have defeated their object. For instance, 
had the notice for the meeting which voted your call been 
given legally or openly, and its object stated, there could 
not have been obtained twenty votes in favor of the measure, 
notwithstanding you were to come " without compensation." 

After summing up the whole matter, you say, " I have now 
given all the facts respecting my coming, your condition and 
your trials." Is this true ? Have you " given all the facts ? " 
Have you told the reader " how you came ? " by what means 
your call was effected ? Did you tell them you were to come 
" without compensation ? " Did you tell them your own family 
connexions came in to your assistance, and helped to foist you 
upon the Society ; that pews were transferred for the purpose of 
making voters, to enable you to place yourself in the pulpit of 
the Bulfinch Street Church ? Surely not. 

As to your proposition to inquire " How Christ has been 
preached ? " I have but little to say. But Sir, have you preached 
" Christ and Him crucified," in your interviews with the differ- 
ent members of your own parish ? Has He been preached in 
your actions as well as in your sermons ? Does " the simple 
truth " of " Christ and Him crucified," teach you to avoid a 
part of your own Society, and to pass them in the streets without 
even a look of recognition, because they, in the exercise of their 
right, have opposed you, and have not seen in you that evi- 
dence of your being the " true shepherd " which you think they 
ought ? Has not your conduct in this case been such as might 
well justify a suspicion, at least, on their part, that you was not 
the true shepherd, but an " hireling that had climbed up some 
other way ? " Does your conduct in this matter resemble the 
example of Him whom you affect to preach ? What an example 
of love to your enemies is here exhibited ! When you meddled 
8 



58 



with the secular matters of the Society, and procured the resig- 
nation of the Clerk, in order that one might be chosen who 
would be more subservient to your interest, was it that you might 
more effectually preach " Christ and Him crucified ? " or was 
it more effectually to secure yourself in a pulpit where your 
standing seemed as precarious as your right was doubtful ? 

When you further meddled with the business matters of the 
Society, and procured the abolition of the regular quarterly 
business meetings of the Society, by calling on those whom you 
thought you could influence in the matter, and persuading them 
to vote to abolish these meetings, was it that you might preach 
" Christ and Him crucified" more effectually? or was it that 
you might prevent the inquiries that were continually being 
made, as to how you became their Pastor ? 

And was it not the effect of these inquiries that you feared 
among those whom you had marshalled for your support ? If 
this was not the reason of your proceedings, then appearances 
have done you great injustice. 

When you assigned as a reason for your coming as Pastor, 
an act which did not transpire till after you had agreed to come, 
was this preaching " Christ and Him crucified ? " or was it 
wounding him " in the house of his friends ? " 

When you interfered and procured the discharge of the Sexton 
of the Church, for mere sectarian purposes, and because he did 
not second your efforts, and would not condescend to make him- 
self the mere tool of a party, and thus deprived him of the hum- 
ble pittance of $175 a-year, did you not then feel that you was 
" persecuted," as was your Master ? and did you then look " to 
that Master, and endeavor to learn " this u of him ? " 

Do you not now feel that you are " persecuted," when you 
and your friends have caused to be advertised for sale some thirty 
Pews, (belonging, as you intimate in your sermons, to those who 
" worship in other Societies,") for the taxes assessed for your 
maintenance ? How like our Master, when he said, " The 



59 



foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests ; but the 
Son of Man hath not where to lay his head ! " 

At the recent annual meeting of the Society, when a Police 
Officer was engaged by your friends to come in, to prevent the 
minority from discussing the propriety of the proceedings of the 
Standing Committee for the past year, and also of the Treasurer's 
Report, was this not in accordance with your policy ? Was you 
not fearful that discussion " would disturb the peace of this har- 
monious Society ? " No doubt you " discovered " that to silence 
the minority " was the best, the only true course to pursue." 

Was it necessary, in preaching " Christ and Him crucified," 
that you should have preached and published your two sermons, 
making false extracts from the Society's records, in order to 
sustain a position which your own necessity in the case must 
have convinced you was wrong ? For no lover of truth will 
support it by false reasons. 

Whatever may have been your motives in the publication, 
however just and true you may have supposed your cause, noth- 
ing could justify the unwarrantable use you have made of the 
Society's records. You have had access to the records, and 
they have been left with you for examination, and you have had 
ample opportunities to consult them ; and if they would not 
sustain you as they were, then you ought not to appeal to them. 

Though the Clerk of the Society is bound by its By-Laws, 
which he has sworn to support, to keep a record of its pro- 
ceedings, " which shall be open to inspection at all times ; " 
yet I have been unable to see them but once since your ser- 
mons were preached, and that was during the absence of 
the Clerk, when they were exhibited to me by the Treasurer 
of the Society, who was then Clerk pro tern. Whether the 
Clerk refused me the records through your influence or not, I 
will not pretend to judge. I have therefore had to depend upon 
the copies made by others, of such portions of the records as I 
could obtain through them ; these, I presume, are correct, and 



60 



I have no reason to doubt it. But, should you find any errors 
in the extracts, you will attribute it to this cause ; and if I have 
made any mistatements in the matter, I shall hold myself ready 
to correct them at once when pointed out to me. I have in- 
tended to deal plainly, at the same time to deal justly ; and 
though I have been compelled, in defence of those who were 
assailed, to publish the names of individuals, I have designed to 
do them no injustice. If I have manifested a spirit at variance 
with " Christian charity," it has been done under the feeling 
that the minority were suffering at your hand a bitter wrong. 
You know this controversy has not been prolonged to this date 
by the will of the minority. They, a long time since, made a 
proposition that they would either buy or sell ; and when they 
found that you and your friends were not willing to make or 
accept any proposition of that kind, they called a meeting of the 
Society, to see if some offer could not be made to them, by 
which this " unpleasant controversy " could be ended. But 
how did you and your friends meet this proposition ? They, 
being the majority, could do as they pleased ; and as soon as 
the meeting was organized they made a motion to adjourn, and 
those who had called the meeting declined voting, on the ground 
that they had called the meeting to hear a proposition ; the vote 
was unanimous to adjourn. 

The Standing Committee after this directed the Treas- 
urer to advertise some of the Pews for sale, belonging to those 
who had refused to pay taxes ever since you came as Pastor. 
On being advised by counsel that they might be wrong, this 
was abandoned, and a new meeting was called for the purpose 
of legalizing the whole business, which was thought to be ille- 
gal. Thus this matter has been prolonged till now. Those who 
oppose you have not been treated as proprietors, and have been 
told by you and others that they were " meddling with what did 
not belong to them." How long this state of things will continue 
I know not, but I am sure that those who oppose you will not 



61 



abandon to you their property and their right in the Church 
you seem so much to covet. They will settle it in any honor- 
able way ; they will submit the whole matter in dispute to any 
competent tribunal, whether civil or ecclesiastical, and abide the 
issue : more than this cannot be asked, unless it be unqualified 
submission. 

I have said that the apparent spirit of your production to a 
casual observer would seem " worthy of all commendation." 
My object has been to investigate the subject, and to show up 
what appeared to me to be false. That I have done it in that 
smooth and apparently honest manner peculiar to yourself, I will 
not pretend. I have only attempted, in my own rough manner, 
to tear off this apparent garb of truth, and to show its deformity. 
To show that 

" A robe of seeming truth and trust 
Hid crafty Observation, 
And secret, hung with poisoned crust 
The dirk of Defamation." 

The minority may have done many things ; no doubt they 
have, that they would not under other circumstances. But you 
will remember that they act on the defensive ; and many things 
may be justifiable in self-defence which would not be as a means 
of attack. They have had to resort to such defence as your 
mode of attack has rendered necessary. And when you have 
summoned " Calumny, with her hundred tongues " to your aid, 
they have only called up Truth, and by the light of her "torch" 
have shown the deformity of the " monster " which has been 
made the instrument of attack ; and you, disgusted and affrighted 
with the appalling appearance of your own agent, when disclosed 
to you, have cried, " Persecution ! persecution ! " The cry is un- 
availing. You have knowingly thrust yourself into the difficulty, 
and if you have been deceived, it has been by your own friends. 
Those whom you call your persecutors told you candidly and 
plainly at the outset what you might expect, and you know if 
you have realized it or not. I have written you plainly, and 



have intended to do it candidly, and have in all cases intended 
strictly to adhere to the truth. No feeling of personal hos- 
tility has influenced me in this matter. But I have felt that the 
circumstances of the case required some public notice of this 
kind ; and in duty to myself, and in compliance with the 
wishes of the minority, 1 have thus publicly addressed you. 

A PROPRIETOR 

In the Bulfinch Street Church. 



